Is it possible to use a variable inside the error message referring to the label of the form element? It's possible to map custom variables like %hostname% (in email validator) and the %value% is also available, but I'd like to have the form label as well.
I could't find it in the ZF codebase, but the use case is for example that the Zend_Validate_NotEmpty can return a message like:
"The field %label% is required and can't be empty"
Instead of:
"Value is required and can't be empty"
I think it's not possible without subclassing the validators. The Zend_Validate classes are not intended to be used with Zend_Form_Element only. Having a %label% in the message would introduce a coupling between both components.
A possible solution could be to create custom validators by extending Zend_Validate_NotEmpty (or whatever validators you are using) and pass the label to the constructor. This way, you could compose the appropriate message every time you instantiate it.
EDIT:
If you follow the method above, you could even define your own %label% "magic variable" and attach it to a member of the class. See the $_messageVariables member in the Example #2 in the Zend Framework documentation: Writing validators
Hope that helps...
I finally went with the decorator. The solution of dinopmi is possible, however you need to inject the label all the times. My error decorator for the form element replaces now the %label% to the real label.
Related
I want to set the "standard" TYPO3 field "fe_group" in the extbase controller. As far I see there no "standard" getters and setters? https://typo3.org/api/typo3cms/class_t_y_p_o3_1_1_c_m_s_1_1_extbase_1_1_domain_object_1_1_abstract_entity.html
I tried to implement them in the model, but it does not work - I do not get any error but it is never set.
What exactly I want to do:
I have an object of type \TYPO3\CMS\Extbase\Domain\Model\FrontendUserGroup and I have an object of my record type (I can set other fields without any problems).
Now I want to do something like:
$myobject->addFe_group($feusergroup);
Do I have to implement this by my own to my model? I tried to implement fe_group as ObjectStorage and also as string - does not work? :-(
Does anyone have a solution for this?
Thank you
Christian
First of all: In models please name functions and properties lowerCamelCase. So a field "fe_group" in TCA would become "feGroup" in the model and the function would be "addFeGroup".
FrontendUserGroup model has a function addSubgroup to add other groups as subobjects. Is this the right thing for your purpose or what you need those relation to another group for?
https://typo3.org/api/typo3cms/class_t_y_p_o3_1_1_c_m_s_1_1_extbase_1_1_domain_1_1_model_1_1_frontend_user_group.html
I have an simple object that has a name
public class Foo {
private String name
}
Each user on the site may have up to 10 Foo's associated with them. Within this context, when a new Foo is created, I would like to validate that there isn't another foo associated with the same user that already exists.
I could Create a custom Bean Validator But annotations require the paramaeters to be defined during compilation. How would I then pass across the names of the existing Foos?
As suggested in various places, I could use EL expressions as an alternative way to pick up the data. This feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It also brings in a whole bunch of potential issues to consider least of all being ease of testing.
I could do class-wide validation using a boolean field
#AssertTrue(message="Name already exists")
public boolean isNameUnique() {
return (existingNames.contains(name));
}
But the validation message would not show up next to the name field. It is a cosmetic issue and this can be a backup plan. However, its not ideal.
Which brings me to the question:
Is there a simple way to write a Bean Validator that can check the value against a collection of values at the field level and meet the following restrictions ?
Previous values determined at runtime
Not using things like EL expressions
Field level validation instead of class level.
EDIT in reponse to Hardy:
The Foo class is an entity persisted within a database. They are picked up and used through a DAO interface.
I could loop through the entities but that means plugging the DAO into the validator and not to mention that the I would need to write the same thing again if I have another class that too has this constraint.
It would help to see how you want to use the Foo class. Can you extend your example code? Are they kept in a list of Foo instances. A custom constraint seems to be a good fit. Why do you need to pass any parameters to the constraints. I would just iterate over the foos and check whether the names are unique.
I would like to add widgets (checkboxes) in an already defined form (with configure method).
I can't add them in the definition of the form because the number of widgets varies (according to the object).
I see two ways of doing it :
Either pass a variable into the configure method of the form or maybe use embedded forms.
But which one is the right way ? Is there another solution ?
Thank you
The right way is to pass the object right into the options. In the form you can use the $this->getOption method to retrieve the passed options.
I Agree with Don Pinkster on passing option and use it to configure form in configure() method.
But if need it or can't get the value when instanciating the class, you can use from anywhere :
$form->getWidgetSchema()->offsetSet($name, $widget);
$form->getValidatorSchema()->offsetSet($name, $validator)
The fact you use embedded forms or widget will not change that much, as you can do this after the form is initially configured :
$form->embedForm($name, $form2);
For just one checkbox I don't see advantages in using embedded form.
In both cases, I suggest you do this in a public method from your form's class, to avoid exploding the form configuration in the action class or elsewhere.
Regards,
I am making a custom ActiveForm method, but it requires the model to have a certain custom validator attached the the attribute that is being passed through (otherwise who knows what will happen!?)
My question is simply... is there a way to run this check in the code that is reliable?
I don't want to add the validator at runtime. That would create confusion and possibly let someone use this type of field where it ought not be used.
So I want to say something like:
if( model NOT HAVE validationMethod ON property)
throw Exception;
I'm also not sure why you want to do this, but in addition to viewing the rules array you can do:
$model->getValidators($attribute)
to check which validators are active for a particular attribute (or all attributes, if the arg is null. (I'm assuming $attribute = property in your example.)
This will return all the validator objects that are active for the current scenario and you can check if a predefined or custom class exists. It also gets you a bit more info than just the rules array (i.e., the properties of the validator class).
i'm trying to dynamically add the class attribute to the body tag, and i came across this class. but i can't seem to understand how to use this class. i have something like this in my page class (or panel class, as i tried with that too):
add(new BodyTagAttributeModifier("class", "homepage", this));
this doesn't even compile, saying there's something wrong with the 2nd parameter. but i think String is automatically considered a Model in wicket, like the Label class. am i missing something here?
What if you just add an wicket:id to the body attribute and use the AttributeAppender class? Or, if the body attribute already has an id, can't you just use this class?
http://wicket.sourceforge.net/apidocs/wicket/behavior/AttributeAppender.html
Some Wicket Components have this String-to-model-shortcut (like Label), but it's not a general feature. You have to convert your String into a Model manually:
add(new BodyTagAttributeModifier("class", Model.of("homepage"), this));