Commits
-------
71db836 Better config validation handling for numerical values: * New node type Integer and Float * New expressions: min() and max()
Discussion
----------
[2.2] [Config] Better handling for numerical values:
* New node type Integer and Float
* New expressions: ifLessThan(), ifGreaterThan(), ifInRange(), ifNotInRange()
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-03T08:50:22Z
As I said on PR #4713, adding more method clutters the API without any big benefits. I'm -1 on the PR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T08:54:36Z
I have been discuss it with @schmittjoh at the sflive, he was thinking it could be a good addition.
IMHO I think that if we want to encourage the usage of bundle configuration validation, we should make it as easy as possible to use...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T08:59:42Z
A real life example:
->scalarNode('max_nb_items')
->validate()
->ifTrue(function($v){
return !is_int($v) || (is_int($v) && $v<1);
})
->thenInvalid('Must be a positive integer')
->end()
->end()
could be replaced by
->integerNode('max_nb_items')
->validate()
->ifLessThan(1);
->thenInvalid('Must be a positive integer')
->end()
->end()
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by gnutix at 2012-07-03T09:03:06Z
I agree with @jeanmonod on this matter, the bundle configuration validation is already kind of a hassle to understand (and read), so it would be a good addition IMHO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-03T10:54:32Z
@schmittjoh What's your point of view?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-07-03T14:10:37Z
The integer and float nodes are valuable additions imo which I wanted to add myself several times but simply did not have the time for.
As for the changes to the expression builder, I was not really passionate about them in Paris, but I did not mind either way. However, looking at this PR, I think they would be better implemented as methods on the definition builders, and validated directly by the nodes:
```php
$builder->integerNode('foo')->range(1, 4)->end();
$builder->integerNode('foo')->mustBeGreaterThan(5)->end();
```
This will also allow for these constraints to be introspected and added to generated documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-03T17:57:25Z
@jeanmonod Can you take into account the comments by @schmittjoh?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T19:40:24Z
@fabpot Yes, I will try to move those 4 checks.
@schmittjoh If I put those tests into the ScalarNodeDefinition did you think it's ok? And did I have to make anything special for the documentation introspection?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-07-03T19:56:00Z
You can take a look at the EnumNodeDefinition, and the EnumNode. They are
pretty simple, and should give you a good idea of how to implement it.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Jeanmonod David <
reply@reply.github.com
> wrote:
> @fabpot Yes, I will try to move those 4 checks.
>
> @schmittjoh If I put those tests into the ScalarNodeDefinition did you
> think it's ok? And did I have to make anything special for the
> documentation introspection?
>
> ---
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> https://github.com/symfony/symfony/pull/4714#issuecomment-6744309
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T21:37:18Z
OK, I just refactor as requested. At the end, I didn't add the range() check. It can be easily done by chaining min and max, like this:
$builder->integerNode('foo')->min(1)->max(4)->end();
@schmittjoh can you have a look?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-07-03T21:48:17Z
Have you tested the builder API? Did you maybe forget to commit something?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T21:52:45Z
Yes you are right, I forget the definition
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-03T22:15:45Z
OK, I realize now that I misunderstood the concept. I was thinking that a node was able to do self validation. But no, I will have to move my code to the node definition. So let's wait for a new commit...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-06T06:13:55Z
@schmittjoh I just push the move to definition and the new abstract class Numeric. Can you review it?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-10T05:12:59Z
@schmittjoh, @fabpot
I fix all the mention points, can you have a look at the final result?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-07-10T06:38:20Z
There are still some excessive blank lines if you want to be perfect, but overall looks good now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-07-10T07:05:54Z
@schmittjoh I think the comments of @Baachi are not well placed in the diff. I execute php-cs-fix on all code, so level of perfectness is already good ;)
@fabpot Do you want some more complements before merging?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-10T07:07:21Z
@jeanmonod I'm going to review the code once more and it will be merged for 2.2. Thanks for your work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-09-18T13:58:48Z
@jeanmonod Can you squash your commits before I merge? Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-09-18T14:36:59Z
@fabpot Squash done
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-09-19T04:07:13Z
@jeanmonod One last thing: can you submit a PR on symfony/symfony-docs that update the documentation with the new possibilities?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jeanmonod at 2012-09-20T05:32:01Z
@fabpot OK, Documentation PR done here: https://github.com/symfony/symfony-docs/pull/1732
Commits
-------
b7fc009 [Config] Numerical keys for prot. arrays if useAttributeAsKey is set
Discussion
----------
[Config] Numerical keys for prot. arrays if useAttributeAsKey is set
Bug fix: not sure
Feature addition: not sure
Backwards compatibility break: not sure
Symfony2 tests pass: [](http://travis-ci.org/asm89/symfony)
License of the code: MIT
When using an array node with children of prototype array and `useAttributeAsKey`, using numerical values for the keys throws an exception. For example (`useAttributeAsKey('id')`):
``` php
<?php
// works
array (
'thing' => array(
array('foo', 'bar', 'id' => 'a')
)
);
// works and is the same as above
array (
'thing' => array(
'a' => array('foo', 'bar')
)
);
// works
array(
'thing' => array(
array('foo', 'bar', 'id' => 42), array('baz', 'qux', 'id' => 1337),
),
);
// works with this patch and is the same as above
array(
'thing' => array(
42 => array('foo', 'bar'), 1337 => array('baz', 'qux'),
),
);
```
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-14T14:26:32Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1327383) (merged 42d252da into 46ffbd52).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-14T14:32:59Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1327430) (merged b7fc0093 into 46ffbd52).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-21T15:16:24Z
Could this be fixed by changing [PrototypedArrayNode](https://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/master/src/Symfony/Component/Config/Definition/PrototypedArrayNode.php#L255)
`$k = $v[$this->keyAttribute];` -> `$k = (string) $v[$this->keyAttribute];`
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by asm89 at 2012-05-22T07:01:53Z
I tried it and the test I added still fails. The code change you propose doesn't execute because `if (!isset($v[$this->keyAttribute]) && is_int($k))` will still evaluate to true.
