I have setup a asyncValidation for my redux-form. I just figured out, that the changed field always is undefined in the values object that gets passed to the asyncValidate function.
Lets say i change the field firstname from "abc" to "abcd" everything works and the state gets updated. I get the following actions: (redux-form/)FOCUS, CHANGE, BLUR, START_ASYNC_VALIDATION and STOP_ASYNC_VALIDATION.
However, in the asyncValidate function:
handledAsyncValidate = values => {
console.log('values', values)
}
Directly after the change i get: {firstname: undefined, lastname: ''}
But when i trigger an asyncValidation on lastname, firstname is defined with "abcd".
Im using redux-form 6.5. Is there a change i have implemented something the wrong way? I dont use asyncValidateFields but i tested it and it does not change the described effect.
Edit:
Its a fairly large codebase.
Here i create my asyncValidation function and pass it to the form:
https://github.com/tocco/tocco-client/blob/pr/entity-browser/form-refactoring/packages/entity-browser/src/routes/detail/components/DetailView/DetailView.js
When i log values there, the changed field will be undefined.
The form you can find here:
https://github.com/tocco/tocco-client/blob/pr/entity-browser/form-refactoring/packages/entity-browser/src/routes/detail/components/DetailForm/DetailForm.js
More than happy so help you find something specific.
Related
I have a model called EmploymentApplication that uses a JSON field to hold all of the submitted form data when someone submits their application. This field is simply called "data". I'm working on the resource controller's 'index' method. I only want to return the id, and the first name and last name (that's inside the 'data' JSON field).
I'm trying to figure it out in Tinker (there is currently only one application in the DB):
$result = \App\Models\EmploymentApplications\EmploymentApplication::all(['id', 'data->fname', 'data->lname'])
returns:
Illuminate\Database\Eloquent\Collection {#888
all: [
App\Models\EmploymentApplications\EmploymentApplication {#881
id: 1,
`data`->'$."fname"': ""Betty"",
`data`->'$."lname"': ""Sue"",
},
],
}
So, It's returning the correct data. The part that has me stumped is how to access that data->fname and data->lname from here.
$result[0]->id works just fine.
$result[0]->(backtick)data(backtick)->'$."lname"'
throws:
PHP Parse error: Syntax error, unexpected '`', expecting T_STRING or T_VARIABLE or '{' or '$' on line 1
What is the correct way to access these properties?
I know I could just use array_map to clean up the result before returning it from the controller, but what is the best practice here?
Thank you.
Use column aliases:
$result = EmploymentApplication::all(['id', 'data->fname as fname', 'data->lname as lname']);
$result[0]->fname
$result[0]->lname
I am not sure if this is what you mean, but if I am using tinker and want to get information from my database, this is what I use.
DB::select("SELECT id, fname, lname FROM EmploymentApplication")
or if you are looking for a specific id.
DB::select("SELECT id, fname, lname FROM EmploymentApplication WHERE id=1")
I am trying to do simple upsert to the array field based on branch condition. However branch does not accept a reql expression as argument and I get error Expected type SELECTION but found DATUM.
This is probably some obvious thing I've missed, however I can't find any working example anywhere.
Sample source:
var userId = 'userId';
var itemId = 'itemId';
r.db('db').table('items').get(itemId).do(function(item) {
return item('elements').default([]).contains(function (element) {
return element('userId').eq(userId);
}).branch(
r.expr("Element already exist"),
//Error: Expected type SELECTION but found DATUM
item.update({
elements: item('elements').default([]).append({
userId: 'userId'
})
})
)
})
The problem here is that item is a datum, not a selection. This happens because you used r.do. The variable doesn't retain information about where the object originally came from.
A solution that might seem to work would be to write a new r.db('db').table('items').get(itemId) expression. The problem with that option is the behavior isn't atomic -- two different queries might append the same element to the 'elements' array. Instead you should write your query in the form r.db('db').table('items').get(itemId).update(function(item) { return <something>;) so that the update gets applied atomically.
right now in order for the list to render properly I need to have this kind of data passed in:
row = {
id: value,
name: value,
height: value,
categories: [1,2,3,4]
}
how can I adapt the code so that a list works with this kind of data?
row = {
id: value,
name: value,
height: value,
categories: [{id: "1"},{id: "2"},{id: "3"},{id: "4"}]
}
when I try to do that it seems that it applies JSON.stringify to the objects so it is trying to find category with id [Object object]
I would to avoid a per case conversion of data as I do now..
it seems that I cannot do anything in my restClient since the stringify was already applied
I have the same issue when I fetch just one data row e.g in Edit or Create.. categories ReferenceArrayInput is not populated when categories contains objects
Have you tried using format?
https://marmelab.com/admin-on-rest/Inputs.html#transforming-input-value-tofrom-record
Might help transform your input value. Then you can use format() to change values back to the format your API expects.
If this does not work then you will have to probably create a custom component out of ReferenceArrayInput.
(reworded the question hours later to be more descriptive)
I need a little advice on understanding Propel setters/validators in a standalone (non-framework) development.
The documentation on validation states:
Validators help you to validate an input before persisting it to the database.
... and in validator messages we can provided coherent advice on where users can correct entries that don't pass Propel validation.
The sample usage of a validator reads:
$user = new User();
$user->setUsername("foo"); // only 3 in length, which is too short...
if ($objUser->validate()) {
...
The problem I have found with this is 'what if you cannot setXXX() in order to validate it?'
I have a column type DATE and I invite a visitor to enter a date in a web form. They mistype the date and submit 03/18/20q2
I would hope that one of my custom validators would be able to report a validator message and return the form once more to the user to be amended, however this occurs first:
Fatal error: Uncaught exception 'PropelException' with message 'Error parsing date/time value: '03/18/20q2' [wrapped: DateTime::__construct() [<a href='datetime.--construct'>datetime.--construct</a>]: Failed to parse time string (03/18/aaa) at position 5 (/):
In my tests I couldn't get any simple or CustomValidator to fire once I'd written (for example):
$event= new Event();
$event->setDateStart($form_value_for_date); // where values is "03/18/20q2"
I understand why this is so - it would not make sense to be able to create and try to manipulate a new object if you cannot rely on its fields, even before you save it.
The dilemma this gives me is:
If a fatal error can result from invalid entry preventing Propel validation from handling it for me (and therefore the user) and sending back a useful message, should I bother with Propel validation as well as my own security/courtesy validation ?
I cannot find any mention in the docs of what happens if you give Propel - for whatever reason - a value it doesn't anticipate for the field, or how to handle it.
I do hope this makes sense and that someone can point me at a method that will mean I only need to validate input in one place.
I've hacked together a rough ready solution that will allow me to:
Pre-validate a field against a CustomValidator without setting it in the new object
Retrieve the validator's message for return to the user
I take the form input, sanitise it of course, and then create an object:
$event = new Event();
With my user form in mind, I then pre-check the field I know will fatally fall over if the content's bad, and only set the field in my new object if it would validate:
if ($check = $event->flightCheckFail('StartingDate','DateValidator',$sanitisedFormVal))
echo $check;
else
$event->setStartingDate($sanitisedFormVal);
Method flightCheckFail() will return false if the data from the form would validate against the field, it returns the validator's error message if it would fail.
The method's added to my Event class as follows. Its arguments are the field name, the class of the CustomValidator (which simply runs an strtotime check), and the sanitised form value:
public function flightCheckFail($name,$validatorClass,$value) {
$colname = $this->getPeer()->getTableMap()->getColumnByPhpName($name)->getName();
$validators = $this->getPeer()->getTableMap()->getColumn($colname)->getValidators();
foreach($validators as $validatorMap)
if ($validatorMap->getClass() == $validatorClass) {
$validator = BasePeer::getValidator($validatorMap->getClass());
if ( $validator->isValid($validatorMap, $value) === false)
$failureMessage = $validatorMap->getMessage();
} // if $validatorMap->getClass() == $validatorClass
if($failureMessage)
return $failureMessage;
else
return false;
}
I should be able to use this to work around handling dates in forms, but I'll need to check what other types in Propel might require this sort of handling.
I can stop the form handling wherever this reports a validator error message and send it back. When the user enters valid data, Propel (and normal Propel Validation) gets to continue as normal.
If anyone can improve on this I'd love to see your results.
You could also use a MatchValidator, with a date RegExp, no need for extra functions
Assume i have a book entity with an isbn field.
When entered a isbn number, i want 2 fields to be updated: title and author.
My controller looks like this:
def ajaxGetBook = {
def book = Book.findByIsbn(params.isbn)
if(book==null) book = new Book()
render book as JSON
}
So my call works, and i get a full JSON Book.
Now i would like to update 2 texfields by the update attribute
<g:remoteField action="ajaxGetBook" update="title" name="isbn" value="${bookInstance?.book?.isbn}" paramName="isbn"/>
Now the title field gets updated with the full book object, so that doesn't work.
Is it possible to update field title with only the JSON book.title?
Is it possible to update more fields at once?
I could render book.title as JSON but that works for only one field.
Thank you
Well, the g:remoteField tag is explicitly for one field, so you can't use it to update more than one. So, you're left with 2 easy choices:
Use 2 g:remoteField calls... this isn't a bad option, as they would happen in near parallel, as they are Async calls.
Roll your own Ajax. use g:remoteFunction instead, and have the JS function that you place in the "success" attribute take your book, and update the appropriate HTML fields.