Been thinking of implementing an asychronous custom validator for a form with the sole purpose of communicating with a microservice to extract information out of a person's ID number (like age, date of birth, gender, race, etc) and of course whether the ID number is valid or not based on the country they send through.
So if a person enters their ID number and selects a country, a request is fired off to a microservice, and if they haven't set their gender for instance, it automatically populates it, to which they can change it afterwards if need be.
Questions
Is it good/OK practice to set other form control values in a validator according to the following scenario?
If so, how would I go about modifying the other form control values?
Any help would be appreciated :)
Like I said in the comment, a validator should never set or update a value of a form control, group or array. It should only validate.
What you can do however is use the .valueChanges to listen to changes to the form, and in the callback check if a certain control is valid or not, updating some other control accordingly.
Here's an example:
this.form.get('someControl').valueChanges(() => {
if (this.form.get('someControl').valid) {
this.form.get('someOtherControl').setValue(true);
}
});
Related
I implement QuickFix client and I parse SecurityDefinition message ('d') with many user-defined fields. The service provider wants me not to validate user-defined fields, as he says that they add new fields from time to time and don't want to make us (clients) dependant of this.
Is there a way to cancel validation of user-defined fields for one specific message only?
Thanks...
Take a look at the Configuring QuickFIX page, in particular the ValidateUserDefinedFields parameter:
ValidateUserDefinedFields: If set to N, user defined fields will not be rejected if they are not defined in the data dictionary, or are present in messages they do not belong to.
This does not turn off validation of one particular message of course. It turns off validation for User Defined Fields in messages where they are not defined in the Data Dictionary. If the SecurityDefinition message is the only one they add fields to without prior notification then setting ValidateUserDefinedFields to N is probably good enough for you because:
In other messages, either you defined User Defined Fields in your Data Dictionary and they are validated, or you haven't and they are not validated. In the latter case because you probably won't use those fields there's no harm.
In SecurityDefinition only the User Defined Fields you put in your Data Dictionary are validated, other UDF's aren't which is what you want.
If there's still a use-case that would prohibit you from using that configuration option, please let me know in the comments section.
I have a very long order form that enables saving drafts. If saved as draft, only order name is required but when actually placing an order a more thorough validation is required. I implemented this by using different validation groups. When editing the order I display two buttons: "Save draft" and "Place order". Each of them performs validation using a different validation group.
But now I would like to make a button on the list of orders which enables to change order status from 'draft' to 'placed' directly. To do so, validation must be performed without displaying edit form and submitting it. I would just like to validate the entity that is already in the database. I can use the validator service and everything is simple as long as the data is valid. But in case data isn't valid, I would like to redirect user to the edit form with fields with missing data highlighted. The idea seems to load data from database into the form and run validation as if that data were sent using a browser but execution of this doesn't seem to be trivial because Symfony2 triggers validation on form only when binding the request.
I was going through the Symfony source code and found s class called Symfony\Component\Form\Extension\Validator\EventListener\ValidationListener. It seems to attach itself on the FormEvents::POST_SUBMIT event. Is there a way to trigger this event manually from the controller without request binding? Or are there any alternative approaches to my problem?
Just to point out the correct answer already given by Matjaž Drolc in the comments:
If you want to validate a form without getting the data from the request, you have to call the form->submit() function, because Symfony does not validate the fields if they are not marked as submitted, which is done by this function.
Call the function like this
$form->submit(array(), false);
With an empty array as the submitted data and not clearing the missing fields.
I allow Users that have nothing more than username/email/password.
But if they want to access certain areas, i need more information and present a form to them.
Now i want to validate this form, but whatever data is sent, it is valid since the entity is allowed to only have three basic attributes.
Simply checking for the desired fields needed to access a certain area is fairly easy, but communicating missing fields to the form is more complicated.
I'd have to match the fields to the form elements, add custom error messages and so forth.
Is there a best practive for my Problem?
Read up on Validation Groups — that's what you need.
I am writing a search form in CakePHP 2.0, current I have set it up running with the index action and view (it also posts to the index action) with validation against the model so that if anything incorrect is entered into a search field (fields include date, price) there is a nice validation error message next to the element. Basically it is a bit like a scaffolded add form.
If validation is successful I need to actually run a query and return some data. I don't want to display this data in the index view - should I:
Run the query then render a different view (which means the URL doesn't change - not sure I want that).
Store the search parameters in a session, redirect off to another action then retrieve the search details.
Is there any other way?
Both options are ok. You must decide what you like more, to not change the url or to change it?
you may also use the named parameters to pass the info so a user can bookmark their request, though it would need to do the validations in the same page as where it shows results. I usually do this with the cakedc search plugin.
Returning to your two options, if you mean which is better in performance i would choose number one, since the second one needs to load a new model/controller etc
When a new lead comes in, I want to use a before trigger and a Visualforce email template that contains lead field values to send an email using the SingleEmailMessage class. The email is being generated, but all of the lead fields are null even though (known via System.Debug) they do have values going into the call.
Since I'm passing the still-unsaved lead Id via the mail.setWhatId(lead.Id) method, I'm beginning to think that the mail class is using the Id value and trying to do a database look-up rather than as a reference to the still unsaved lead in memory.
Does anyone know if that's the case? My class works flawlessly when the lead already exists.
If it is the case that the Apex mail class does a DB read, any pattern suggestions for the case where one needs to send and email and update a lead field value before the lead is saved? I can't use the Workflow email notification because the email is being addressed to customers, and there's some additional Apex code that sorts out what address to fetch from existing Account records based on some Lead fields--hence I think the need for using VF email templates in the first place.
setWhatId (and pretty much any method that takes an ID value as an argument) definitely does expect the row to be persisted already. To get around this, you should be able to just do your field update in the before trigger, and add an after trigger to send the email.