Grocery crud issue with blank space in primary key - codeigniter

I am using code igniter and Grocery CRUD, however when a register has blank spaces in its primary key (ie Phantom Dancer) the view or edit method from grocery crud doesnt load the field values, but if I change that name for Phantom_Dancer everything works good, does anyone know how to fix this?

Related

Backpack Laravel select2_from_ajax field returns results, but I can't select any

I'm implementing a 'select2_from_ajax' field using Backpack for Laravel.
I've implemented this in other places and it works correctly. But for some reason when implementing it this time it will not let me select any of the options and doesn't show the highlight when mousing over the options. It lists out the options correctly, I just can't select any of them.
The only thing I can think of is that the relationship it's trying to reference doesn't have a primary 'id' field in the database, but I'm not sure why that would affect this.
I have implemented both the index and show routes.
The issue was that the relationship field's primary key was not 'id' it was setup with a different column name.
I reworked the data structure so the foreign key referenced was pointing to a column labeled 'id'.

DATA_LENGTH_0 in maintenance view

I created a view for a client-independent customizing table. The primary key consists of three components - first one being a secondary key on a check table. It is also used to form subsets of the table data. Altogether, it looks something like this:
Column Key
------ --------
frmd Secondary check table and Subset
attr1 KEY
attr2 KEY
url
But everytime I try to insert a new key combination, the view dumps with DATA_LENGTH_0 CX_SY_RANGE_OUT_OF_BOUNDS, because the report tries to access a string. Apparently it is somehow related to the field generictrp being set. What does this flag tell me and how do I change it? Also non-key components like url are not being fetched - the column is totally empty.
Modifying the customizing table via transaction SM30 works fine, but I don't want that ugly first column.
I've tried to recreate the view multiple times and I also compared the settings with existing customizing views.
Access is set to read,change, delete and insert
Display/Maintenance is allowed
Selecting everything from the View with SELECT works fine
EDIT
Picture 1: what I have
Picture 2: what I want; without the first key column...
The most likely reason I faced this problem, is that I had a foreign key of type i. I changed the type to n and regenerated everything.
Seems to work for now.

creating a form field populated by a relationship in Laravel 4

I am trying to build a form for a Happening. The Happening references a Places table by place_id.
e.g. happening "OktoberFest" has a place_id 123 which corresponds in table Places to München
These are the relationships declared in the models:
For model Place:
public function happenings()
{
return $this->hasMany('Happening');
}
For model Happening:
public function place()
{
return $this->belongsTo('Place');
}
model Happening has a place_id field linking it to Place.
I am also using {{Form::model($happening, array('route' => array('happenings.update', $happening->id)...}} as form opening
Problem 1: how to create a {{Form::text('......')}} that will be properly prefilled with München when editing the happening Oktoberfest ?
Problem 2: I was trying to get that field to work as an ajax autosuggest (i.e. starting to pull suggestions from the Places table as soon as 3 characters have been entered). I have checked a few implementations but they don't seem to mix correctly with Problem 1
To try and solve Problem 1, I have tried the solution here
Laravel 4 Form builder Custom Fields Macro
but I was unable to make it work.
Long question, it's my very first on stack overflow, please be patient :)
If a Happening is linked to Place via the column 'place_id' you have to supply an id to save in your model/table.
There are a couple of ways that I can think of:
make a list of availble Places in a radio of select, the name will be 'place_id', the value the id of the Place en something like title for the value.
instead of displaying radio's or a select a textfield with autocomplete is a great solution if you got a lot of places. I won't go into detail how to implement it but the general idea is to autocomplete the typed in placename and on selection of that place to put the id of that place in a hidden field named 'placed_id'
After saving the form save your model with the posted place_id
(and check that id if it's valid and existing, never trust user input )

Concrete 5 ADODB update and insert duplicate primary key

I'm creating a new package for Concrete 5 (5.4.0+). Inserting a new block works perfectly. But when I edit an existing block, it tries to INSERT again when I click 'save', instead of UPDATE.
The two fields on the database that affect this are bID and eID. Both are non-auto-incrementing INT(10) default none NOT NULL.
The values are passed in an associative array $args in the controller and I'm calling the parent save method with Parent::save($args);
Any help/input would be appreciated. PS: I have looked over this on the net and the C5 forums did turn up some stuff which I tried, mostly relating to the database fields, but I still get the above error. I don't want to overwrite the ADODB save() method if possible.
--- EDIT ---
Perhaps I'm looking at this all wrong. Let me say what I'm trying to achieve. I need the eID to remain 37 (for example) across multiple edits of the block. The bID can increment away AFAIC.
How do I get the eID to remain 37 on edit, but increment by 1 on creation of a new instance? Make sense?
A second table references the eID field, and edited instances of an entry on this table must have the same eID unless a new instance is created. Sry - clear as mud I know.
Are you saying you get a new instance of the block appearing on your page, rather than a new version of the existing one? I don't think the problem is with there being a new record inserted in your table, since new records are normally created when you edit a block. C5 keeps the older version of the block.
The custom blocks I've done have never required a call to the parent save method. You just need an edit form that collects the data and designates which database field it corresponds to, and the parent controller knows what to do with it when the form is submitted.
For example, if you have a text field in your block table called "firstname" that you are updating, you would add a line to your edit.php file like this:
<?php echo $form->text('firstname', $firstname, array('style' => 'width: 320px'));?>
My block editors contain little else than this, other than html/CSS stuff to add labels and make the form look better. The $form object takes care of everything else.
One thing that really helped me understand blocks and block controllers was to download and install the "designer content" add-on. It's free. You can use it to build some custom blocks, then look at the code it generates to perform various functions.
So I looked into the existing packages to duplicate this funcitonality and my question has evolved into this: PHP Concrete 5 Pass Variables to Add.php
Follow the rabbit ;)

MCV3: View to edit entity has to hold every column?

I got a silly general question...
If I generate a strongly typed view of an entity and chose "edit" as scaffolding, then the view does contain every column for that table. Changing and saving the values via setting it modifierd and call db.SaveChanges() does work in the controller. So far, so good.
But if I remove just one of that columns inside the view, then saving doesn't work anymore.
Is there a rule describing this? Is it only possible to make view with every column when wanting to save the model later on? I don't want to make 90 of 100 columns "hidden"...
PS: When editing a value in another table which is connected via Foreign Key (like customer.address.STREET) saving also does not work. Does everything of the entity ADDRESS has to be inside the view? I really don't get that.
Besides that: If I create my own ViewModel containing two entities: Do they also have to hold every column of both entities? This would be a whole bunch of traffic...
Answer is: You should not use the .Modified state. Instead using the UpdateModel method works fine without every field.

Resources