I am using sonata admin for my project as backend.
I have a module and where i have status in the filter like below :
$datagridMapper->add('status', '', array('label' => 'Status','field_type' => 'choice','field_options' => array('choices'=> array('Complete' => 1, 'Pending' => 0,'Error' => 2))));
It is working fine but in advance filter I got arithmetic filters which looks weird for filtering functionality.
Here i attach that image how it looks like:
I want to remove that arithmetic filters and want to put my own there , OR i want to hide that filter for that module only.
Thanks
Advanced filters depends on rendering type. I think what you looking for is something similiar which is implemented for example in Sonata\DoctrineORMAdminBundle\Filter\ChoiceFilter, you see there in getRenderSettings() variable settings operator_type. This determine which operators are set in advanced filtering.
I didn't found way how to simple override this settings from AdminClas, but you can extends Sonata\AdminBundle\Form\Type\Filter\ChoiceType and create new type with your defined settings for advanced filtering.
Btw. if you filter status by database field, by example Doctrine, then setting settings then you can simple do (settings second parameter):
protected function configureDatagridFilters(DatagridMapper $datagridMapper)
{
$datagridMapper
->add('status', 'doctrine_orm_choice', ..
Which will solve your problem.
Related
Using the Play Framework (2.6) documentation; I am attempting to handle form submission. But I'm running into an issue in repopulating the form fields - which is what I want to do if it has errors (so users can edit their entry rather than having to re-enter).
newForm.bindFromRequest.fold(
errorForm => {
BadRequest(views.html.form(errorForm))
},
formData => {
val oWriteJso = Json.toJsObject(formData) match {
case x if(x.fields.nonEmpty) => getCreatedFieldValues(x)
case _ => None
}
val oRes = Redirect(routes.Application.index).flashing("success" -> "Entry saved!")
apiC.writeAndRedirect("c", collName, None, oWriteJso)(oRes)(request)
}
)
My issue is that the example in the documentation only shows how to pass errorForm directly to a form template (e.g. views.html.form) rather than being able to render the whole page again (i.e. using views.html.index or a Redirect) with the input form fields being populated from the previous request. I found this answer as the closest to this issue but it is a little old and I am using Scala so wasn't able to implement it. Just have no idea how anyone else is doing this or what the sensible, standard approach is. Thanks for any light on this_
If you use the Play helper functions for generating input tags in your view file. They should populate with your values from the last request.
For example you can create an HTML form in your view file using helper methods like this:
#helper.form(action = routes.Application.userPost()) {
#helper.inputText(userForm("name"))
#helper.inputText(userForm("age"))
}
You can take a look at Play documentation about helpers in view files at the following link:
https://www.playframework.com/documentation/2.7.x/ScalaForms#Showing-forms-in-a-view-template
I am trying to have a REST design, but I am running in a bit of a problem. I have a resource schedule. Therefore, the normal notation of /schedules/{id} is not very applicable since I would like to have /schedules/{day}/{month}/{year} and then apply REST, and have /edit and such.
Is there a way to do this with Route::resource() ? or do I need to do them through Route::get() ?
As far as I know route::resource only gives you the routes that are detailed in the documentation so for what you want you would need to declare your own route. It is still restful and if it is only one of the resourceful routes you want to change you should still be able to do the following because the routes are prioritized in the order they are declared.
Route::get('schedule/{day}/{month}/{year}/edit', array('as' => 'editSchedule', 'uses' => 'ScheduleController#edit'));
Route::resource('schedule', 'ScheduleController');
Yes, there is a very simple way. Here is an example:
Specify your route like this:
Route::resource("schedules/day.month.year", "ScheduleController");
The request will be like this:
/schedules/day/1/month/12/year/2014
And now you can get all three parameters in show method of your
contoller:
public function show($day, $month, $year)
Hi there this might be handy if you want to call your route by name. Also you can use one or multiple parameters. It works with me on laravel 5.1
According to the laravel docs:
http://laravel.com/docs/5.1/routing#named-routes
Route::get('user/{id}/profile', ['as' => 'profile', function ($id) {
//
}]);
$url = route('profile', ['id' => 1]);
This works with Route:resource aswell.
for example:
Route::resource('{foo}/{bar}/dashboard', 'YourController');
Will create named routes like: {foo}.{bar}.dashboard.show
To call this with the route method, you set it up as followed.
route('{foo}.{bar}.dashboard.show', ['foo' => 1, 'bar'=> 2])
Which will create the url yourdomain.com/1/2/dashboard
Ill hope this is usefull.
Pascal
I'm working on a eZ publish 5 project. This CMS is based on symfony 2.
I have built a form without class as described in tge page : http://symfony.com/doc/current/book/forms.html#using-a-form-without-a-class
On the eZ publish 5 documentation (https://confluence.ez.no/display/EZP/Legacy+configuration+injection) I read that I need to set the CSRF intention parameter to 'legacy'. I can't figure how to do this. I tried to use the add method on my formBuilder :
$this->createFormBuilder()->add('_token', 'csrf', array('intention'=>'legacy');
But I get an error 'could not load type csrf'.
Can someone help me on this ?
Thanks.
Okay, I have given this a try.
My first answer is actually a question: If you don't intend to execute any legacy kernel code as a follow-up to your form, you don't need to care about the intention, I believe.
Intentions between the Symfony and legacy kernels only need to match if the Legacy Kernel is booted (in which case it will check if there is a token, and if it is valid).
If you need to use the Legacy Kernel, you can set the intention to legacy by passing custom form options:
$formOptions = array( 'intention' => 'legacy' );
$form = $this->createFormBuilder( null, $formOptions )
->add( 'text', 'text' )
->getForm();
Setting the default intention is explained in http://symfony.com/doc/current/book/forms.html#csrf-protection, but I wouldn't really advise this, unless you intend to only rely on the legacy kernel.
I created a my own validation class under /library/My/Validate/
In my form I have $this->addElementPrefixPath('My_Validate', 'My/Validate', 'validate');
I am using my validator like so:
$this->addElement('text', 'aField', array(
'validators' => array(
array('TestValidator', false, array('messages' => 'test failed')
),
));
This all works. However, I am interested in improving this in two ways.
I would like to make it so that all forms have access to my validator. Calling addElementPrefixPath() in every form doesn't seem to be a clean way of doing this.
I would like to pass in My_Validate_TestValidator instead of TestValidator so other developers know what they are working with right away.
To answer your first question, the only real easy way to do this would be to create your own instance of the form - My_Form_Abstract - which has an init() method that sets the prefix path - and then of course calls the parent init().
I'm not aware of a way to make your second method work flawlessly. You need to store a prefix in order to build the validator loader correctly. However, as an alternative, you might try creating new instances of the class using the full name, and then adding it to the element:
$element = $this->getElement('aField');
$myValidateTestValidator = new My_Validate_TestValidator();
$element->addValidator($myValidateTestValidator);
I'm writing my first community page with Lithium and mongoDB. I really like the schema-less way of mongo, but there is one problem making it impossible working without a schema:
For instance we have a simple form like this:
<?=$this->form->create();?>
<?=$this->form->field('name',array('label' => 'Topic title'));?>
<?=$this->form->field('text',array('label' => 'Content'));?>
<?=$this->form->submit('create');?>
which will be even simpler saved by this:
if($this->request->is('post')) {
$board_post = BoardPosts::create($this->request->data);
$board_post->save();
}
Now it's possible for everyone to add some form inputs by DOM manipulation with Firebug, Developer Tools etc. Of course that it might be some sensless fields in the database, but maybe someone adds a field, that is really used.
The only way to prevent this, is creating a schema in model. But for me this makes the whole idea of a schema-less database useless, doesn't it? And how to make schemas for different situations/actions, when some fields must not occur?
The Model::save() method accepts a 'whitelist' param in its options. See http://li3.me/docs/lithium/data/Model::save()
$whitelist = array(
'title',
'text'
);
$post = BoardPosts::create();
$post->save($this->request->data, compact('whitelist'));
You can also define protected $_schema in your Model and set protected $_meta = array('locked' => true); which will automatically set the whitelist to the fields defined in your schema. However, it is a good idea to define the whitelist in your controller to avoid attacks like you describe.
This problem is called a mass-assignment vulnerability and exists in many frameworks if developers are not careful.