Commits
-------
6489a65 [Form] Added an exception for invalid type services
Discussion
----------
[Form] Added an exception for invalid type services
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes [](http://travis-ci.org/stof/symfony) (Travis fails randomly for the performance test)
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: -
Before the introduction of the FormRegistry, the getName() method was
never used for types registered through the DI container. The
FormRegistry now uses the getName() method and missconfigured services
will trigger a notice.
This was reported in FriendsOfSymfony/FOSCommentBundle#234
Before the introduction of the FormRegistry, the getName() method was
never used for types registered through the DI container. The
FormRegistry now uses the getName() method and missconfigured services
will trigger a notice.
This was reported in FriendsOfSymfony/FOSCommentBundle#234
Commits
-------
cd7835d [Form] Cached the form type hierarchy in order to improve performance
2ca753b [Form] Fixed choice list hashing in DoctrineType
2bf4d6c [Form] Fixed FormFactory not to set "data" option if not explicitely given
7149d26 [Form] Removed invalid PHPDoc text
Discussion
----------
[Form] WIP Improved performance of form building
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: **Update the Silex extension**
This PR is work in progress and up for discussion. It increases the performance of FormFactory::createForm() on a specific, heavy-weight form from **0.848** to **0.580** seconds.
Before, the FormFactory had to traverse the hierarchy and calculate the default options of each FormType everytime a form was created of that type.
Now, FormTypes are wrapped within instances of a new class `ResolvedFormType`, which caches the parent type, the type's extensions and its default options.
The updated responsibilities: `FormFactory` is a registry and proxy for `ResolvedFormType` objects, `FormType` specifies how a form can be built on a specific layer of the type hierarchy (e.g. "form", or "date", etc.) and `ResolvedFormType` *does the actual building* across all layers of the hierarchy (by delegating to the parent type, which delegates to its parent type etc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-07-12T18:25:40Z
Maybe ResolvedFormType
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jmather at 2012-07-13T02:56:38Z
I really like ResolvedFormType. That's the naming method I took for my tag parser that handes the same conceptual issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by axelarge at 2012-07-13T05:25:00Z
ResolvedFormType sounds very clear.
This change is great and I desperately hope to see more of this kind
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Baachi at 2012-07-13T06:41:26Z
Yes `ResolvedFormType` sounds good :) 👍
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-13T07:11:33Z
I like `ResolvedFormType` as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by henrikbjorn at 2012-07-13T07:46:48Z
👍 `ResolvedFormType` :shipit:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-07-13T18:01:51Z
This looks good to me
Commits
-------
f71e2a8 [Form] FormBuilder Bug Fix: remove() was not properly removing children
Discussion
----------
[Form] FormBuilder Bug Fix: remove() was not properly removing children
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #4803
License of the code: MIT
FormBuilder initially sets unresolved children as NULL, until resolved.
If FormBuilder::remove() is called before that child is resolved, the
if statement turns false, because isset(null) is false, when it should
be true. Instead, we should check to see if the key exists, and if so,
process and unset it.
Closes#4803
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-07-10T07:41:55Z
Can you please add a test covering this case?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by ChrisTickner at 2012-07-10T09:43:07Z
Sure, added a test case. It fails before the patch and passes after.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-07-10T09:47:06Z
Thanks. Can you please add a comment to the test with the URL of this PR? Also, please squash your commits into one when your done.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by ChrisTickner at 2012-07-10T10:02:16Z
Oops, I deleted the remote branch and re-pushed without realizing we'd lose some history on this PR page. Live and learn I suppose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-07-10T10:18:20Z
Thanks!
FormBuilder initially sets unresolved children as NULL, until resolved.
If FormBuilder::remove() is called before that child is resolved, the
if statement turns false, because isset(null) is false, when it should
be true. Instead, we should check to see if the key exists, and if so,
process and unset it.
Closes#4803
Commits
-------
6ad4018 [Form] Also display the hint about adder/remover on invalid property access
Discussion
----------
[Form] Also display the hint about adder/remover on invalid property access
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
This PR follows up #4777. In this case the hint about adders and removers is also added when a property is found, but is not public, a common case.
Commits
-------
9c94b48 [Form] Fixed the "data" option to supersede default data set in the model
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed the "data" option to supersede default data set in the model
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3899
Todo: -
Commits
-------
7727de7 [Form] Deprecated Form::bindRequest() and replaced it by a PRE_BIND listener
Discussion
----------
[Form] Deprecated Form::bindRequest() and replaced it by a PRE_BIND listener
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: -
Instead of `bindRequest`, you should now simply call `bind`:
Before:
```
$form->bindRequest($request);
```
After:
```
$form->bind($request);
```
Commits
-------
eba7dfe Revert "[Form] added a circular reference safeguard for form type"
Discussion
----------
Revert "[Form] added a circular reference safeguard for form type"
This reverts commit ea93e4cafa.
Conflicts:
src/Symfony/Component/Form/FormBuilder.php
src/Symfony/Component/Form/FormFactory.php
Commits
-------
df5bb4a [Form] Unified rendering of errors for nested elements
Discussion
----------
[Form] Unified rendering of errors for nested elements
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: yes?
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #4615
Todo: -
Commits
-------
1345360 [Form] Fixed PropertyPath handling of offsetGet() that returns a constant value
6e1462e [Form] Fixed PropertyPath handling of __get() method that returns a constant
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed "Indirect modification.." exceptions in PropertyPath
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #4450, #4535?, #4612
Todo: -
Commits
-------
040ba8f [Form] Fixed: ChoiceType omits the "empty_value" option if the choices contain an empty element
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed: ChoiceType omits the "empty_value" option if the choices contain an empty element
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3854, #3864
Todo: -
Commits
-------
6d94f3e Ensure there is a session before getting the session id
Discussion
----------
[Form] Ensure there is a session before getting the session id
Solves "The CSRF token is invalid. Please try to resubmit the form" error when a form is generated before the session is started.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-09T10:23:32Z
Adding a CSRF token only makes sense if you are on a page with a "user". If not (and if you don't use HTTP auth or whatever), then there is no need for a CSRF token.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by frosas at 2012-07-09T14:42:40Z
This PR doesn't change any logic on whether a CSRF token is added or not, it just fixes a bug when a token is requested.
Commits
-------
1fa22d9 [Form] Output a more usable error when PropertyPath has tried to find adders and getters, but failed to find them
Discussion
----------
[Form] Output a more usable error when PropertyPath has tried to find ad...
...ders and getters, but failed to find them
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
I've refactored the writeProperty method of propertypath in order to supply a better error message when writing has failed.
The writeProperty method itself now finds singulars (if a singular was not passed) for the private findAdderAndRemover method which allowed for some duplicate code to be removed and since the writeProperty now holds this data, it can provide a more verbose exception message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-07-09T13:54:35Z
Apart from the typo this PR looks good.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Burgov at 2012-07-09T14:01:04Z
fixed&squashed
Commits
-------
d6e1f39 [Form] Fixed FormBuilder to maintain order of its children
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed FormBuilder to maintain order of its children
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #4693
Todo: -
Commits
-------
6f9eda9 [Form][Validator] Fixed generation of HTML5 pattern attribute based on Assert\Regex to remove delimiters.
Discussion
----------
[Form][Validator] Fixed generation of HTML5 pattern attribute based on Assert\Regex by removing delimiters or using a new option: htmlPattern.
Hopefully, this time is the good one…
* Fixes: [#3766, #4077, #4513, #4520, #4521]
* Bug fix: yes
* Feature addition: yes
* BC break: no
* Symfony2 tests pass: yes
In Issue #3766, it was asked that Assert\Regex generates HTML5 pattern attribute.
It was done in PR #4077, but the generated Regex is in delimited format which is not supported by HTML5.
Hence, `/[a-z]+/` would be converted to `[a-z]+`.
If flags are specified like in `/[a-z]+/i`, it cannot be converted and pattern validation will be disabled client-side. If is however now possible, using a new option, `htmlPattern`, to specify the pattern you want to be used.
Example:
```php
<?php
/**
* @Assert\Regex(pattern="/^[0-9]+[a-z]*$/i", htmlPattern="^[0-9]+[a-zA-Z]*$")
*/
private $civic_number;
```
**Note**: [Documentation](http://symfony.com/doc/current/reference/constraints/Regex.html) should be updated accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lavoiesl at 2012-06-08T15:45:17Z
God, I just found out you can "add more commits to this pull request by pushing to the master branch on lavoiesl/symfony"…
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-08T15:50:31Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1568634) (merged 2d767b41 into b84b46ba).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by petajaros at 2012-07-04T14:23:16Z
Anything new about this issue?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lavoiesl at 2012-07-04T16:25:43Z
Alright, tests are passing using `phpunit -c phpunit.xml.dist --filter 'RegexValidatorTest'`. @travisbot reports errors because he can’t even start the tests due to dependencies, which is not related
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-07-04T16:31:13Z
It should be ready to merge when you have taken the last comments into account. thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lavoiesl at 2012-07-04T16:39:05Z
So it seems this PR will finally pass, thanks a lot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-07-04T17:03:35Z
Thank you for this PR and the changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-07-04T17:10:20Z
@lavoiesl Can you squash your commits before I merge? Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lavoiesl at 2012-07-04T17:25:18Z
There. I also left trace of some commits I did.
Thanks
[Validator] Added delimiter escaping to Validator\Constraints\Regex::getNonDelimitedPattern
[Form][Validator] Added htmlPattern option for Regex Validation.
[Validator] Fixed Validator\Constraints\Regex::getNonDelimitedPattern variable declarations
[Validator] Fixed tests for Regex htmlPattern option (instead of html_pattern)
[Validation] tweaked generation of pattern to include .* when not anchors are present. Also removed the exception and made getNonDelimitedPattern private
Commits
-------
c1e4166 moved create of default form label to view layer
Discussion
----------
move create of default form label to view layer
A small optimization if you provide custom labels in the view layer (i.e. `{{ form_label(form.name, 'Your name') }}`
```
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: yes
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: ~
Todo: ~
License of the code: MIT
Documentation PR: ~
```
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-24T14:45:17Z
This pull request [fails](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1694310) (merged 37f0b774 into 0d4b02e4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-24T15:03:44Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1694418) (merged c1e4166e into 0d4b02e4).
Commits
-------
6b5b625 [Form] added FormBuilderInterface in Tests namespace, so as to enable easy mocking
Discussion
----------
[Form] added FormBuilderInterface in Tests namespace, so as to enable ea...
...sy mocking
Adding a ``FormBuilderInterface`` in the ``Tests`` namespace, along same lines as ``FormInterface`` already there, for the purposes of being able to mock it straightforwardly (as ``FormBuilderInterface`` extends ``\Traversable``, and therefore creating a mock in PHPUnit causes a fatal error that the mock ``must implement interface Traversable as part of either Iterator or IteratorAggregate``). Currently in the tests a ``FormBuilder`` object is used with a mock event dispatcher and form factory passed into the constructor, but this is long-winded to have to do in tests for code outside the framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-13T22:03:12Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1613957) (merged 6b5b625a into c07e9163).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-06-14T07:22:33Z
👍
This issue camelizes the 'add' and 'remove' methods,
as it is already done with the 'set' method.
This fixes a problem with properties like 'custom_messages',
where the 'add' and 'remove' methods are 'addCustom_message'
and 'removeCustom_message' instead of 'addCustomMessage'
and 'removeCustomMessage'.
Commits
-------
bfe5e58 [Form] fixed typo in docblock
Discussion
----------
[Form] fixed typo in docblock
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-15T20:03:08Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1630865) (merged bfe5e585 into f881d282).
Commits
-------
b5cf337 [Form] Enhanced the form error message
Discussion
----------
[Form] Enhanced the form error message
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
The error message on type mismatch is a bit obscure:
The form's view data is expected to be an instance of class Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour, but has the type object. You can avoid this error by setting the "data_class" option to null or by adding a view transformer that transforms object to Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour.
This commit changes it to:
The form's view data is expected to be an instance of class Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour, but is an instance of class Closure. You can avoid this error by setting the "data_class" option to null or by adding a view transformer that transforms an instance of Closure to an instance of class Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-12T14:04:08Z
This pull request [fails](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1601478) (merged 70a15df6 into 77839690).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-12T14:06:31Z
This pull request [fails](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1601507) (merged 12ec4dbd into 77839690).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-06-12T14:13:09Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1601517) (merged b5cf337c into 77839690).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-06-12T18:21:31Z
👍 Thanks!
The error message on type mismatch is a bit obscure:
The form's view data is expected to be an instance of class Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour, but has the type object. You can avoid this error by setting the "data_class" option to null or by adding a view transformer that transforms object to Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour.
This commit changes it to:
The form's view data is expected to be an instance of class Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour, but is an instance of Closure. You can avoid this error by setting the "data_class" option to null or by adding a view transformer that transforms an instance of Closure to an instance of Samson\Bundle\TRSBundle\Entity\Labour.
Commits
-------
a30f4a0 [Form] cleanup
Discussion
----------
[Form] cleanup
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-27T19:47:21Z
This pull request [fails](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1450050) (merged 09574f4b into adf07f1e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-27T19:57:42Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1450149) (merged a8c63d72 into adf07f1e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-27T20:00:13Z
thanks a bunch @travisbot !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-28T06:52:52Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1453555) (merged a30f4a03 into adf07f1e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-05-28T09:20:05Z
Thank you Victor! 👍
Commits
-------
59c4f55 a few minor changes
Discussion
----------
a few minor changes / cleanup
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-27T07:58:52Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1446431) (merged bb7ae326 into 9e951991).
Commits
-------
b4e2818 [Form] Using new methods instead of the deprecated
Discussion
----------
[Form] Using new methods instead of the deprecated
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-25T21:05:11Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1436891) (merged b4e28186 into ff4d446c).
fixed bug with parent property
fix is_required field
fixed subform translation_domain inheritance
some translation_domain inheritance code refactoring
added form type translation_domain inheritance tests
changed methods place in form type test
changed arguments in createNamed method call in FormTypeTest
Commits
-------
82c221a [Form] Fixed strict "data_class" check to work with instances of \ArrayAccess
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed collection type to work with recent Form changes
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by tristanbes at 2012-05-22T16:42:36Z
Ping @fabpot Could you please merge it ASAP, because this bugs breaks all forms containing collection type.
Thanks
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-22T16:54:24Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1401580) (merged 82c221a1 into 1a1403f5).
Commits
-------
f883953 TypeGuess fixed for Date/Time constraints
41bed29 [Form] fixed invalid 'type' option in ValidatorTypeGuesser for Date/TimeFields
Discussion
----------
[Form] fixed invalid 'type' option in ValidatorTypeGuesser for Date/TimeFields
Automatic field type guessing breaks, if you use any of the Date/Time
constraints (i.e. Symfony\Component\Validator\Constraints\DateTime), since these field types have no 'type' option defined.
(See getDefaultOptions() in DateTimeType.php)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-10T15:25:16Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1296309) (merged 005bdbb0 into 68eca0f9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-18T15:50:39Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1367774) (merged f8839532 into a04acc89).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by TonyMalz at 2012-05-18T15:58:57Z
@bschussek Ok, changed it to 'input'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-05-22T08:18:27Z
👍
This reverts commit 5182a0c2c4.
PropertyPath instances should be empty. If you have an empty property path string, there is no need to create a PropertyPath instance for it.
Conflicts:
tests/Symfony/Tests/Component/Form/PropertyPathTest.php
Commits
-------
3a5e84f [Validator] Add CollectionSize constraint
Discussion
----------
[Validator] Add CollectionSize constraint
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: -
I will also send a PR to the documentation as soon as this one is accepted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-29T08:24:28Z
-1
I dislike the rising amount of very specific constraints in the core. Can't we add this to Size?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-29T09:01:39Z
@bschussek #3918 implements what you propose but then the messages are not valid any more:
```php
<?php
public $minMessage = 'This value should be {{ limit }} or more';
public $maxMessage = 'This value should be {{ limit }} or less';
public $invalidMessage = 'This value should be a valid number';
```
I can imagine 2 solutions:
- adding some more message,
- rename the `Size` constraint to `Range` and create a new `Size` constraint for arrays / countables.
What do you think ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-29T09:27:53Z
I'd prefer the second solution and merge `Size` with `SizeLength` as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-29T09:34:50Z
@bschussek It would make sense. @makasim @Herzult any one of you would like to contribute this (i.e. rename the current Size to Range and create a new Size supporting arrays / countables / strings) ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-04-29T14:31:12Z
Yep, I'm on it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-29T15:22:44Z
@Herzult could you take the other comment into account and merge SizeLength into you Size ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-29T15:33:05Z
The guessers should also be modified (it might also affect the ODM which is in an other repo, if so it would be good to sync the changes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-04-29T16:38:19Z
@stof the problem merging SizeLength into Size is that they don't have the same required options & messages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-04-29T16:47:40Z
And what about renaming Range to Interval and SizeLength to IntervalLength?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-29T16:54:38Z
Well, SizeLength is about matching the length of a string currently. Nothing related to intervals
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-04-29T17:29:40Z
Here are the current names:
* **Size** for collection (countable) size
* **Range** for numbers
* **SizeLength** for strings
Merging **SizeLength** into **Size** is maybe not appropriate because collections and strings are different things. It'll be hard to find messages that fit both collections and strings. Maybe we had better to find a better name for both. What do you think?
About the ValidatorTypeGuesser, I'll update it as soon as we know ow to name the constraints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-29T17:43:01Z
Size is a good name for both strings and "collections", could we have two sets of strings and select according to the type ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-04-29T22:39:55Z
I tried to merge them together, what do you think?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-30T06:52:37Z
I think your changes are great, may be @bschussek has more feedback. The ValidatorTypeGuesser and the translation are yet to be updated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by hhamon at 2012-05-01T12:32:28Z
Am I missing something or `SizeLength` for strings is a duplicate for `MinLength` and `MaxLength` constraints?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-05-02T13:29:36Z
Yep, that's true. But the only link between this PR and the SizeLength constraint is that I merged it to the one I introduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Herzult at 2012-05-07T07:48:01Z
@bschussek what do you think?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-10T19:51:26Z
@Herzult this PR looks good to me, could you update the changelog and update guides, try to factorize the code and squash the commits ? Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-11T15:42:35Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1306112) (merged 8d8e6443 into 4ac3bddb).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-11T21:42:21Z
* could #4259 be helpful ?
* please squash the commits.
* please create a PR / issue on [symfony-docs](https://github.com/symfony/symfony-docs)
thanks for the updates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-13T18:38:18Z
This pull request [fails](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1321123) (merged eeda9044 into 4ac3bddb).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-13T18:45:12Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1321146) (merged 491ca19a into 8b54eb56).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-14T11:29:39Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1326110) (merged 44865024 into 8b54eb56).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-14T11:49:37Z
@Herzult what about plural translations ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-14T16:52:37Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1328677) (merged 93480f95 into 46ffbd52).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-14T17:03:13Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1328705) (merged 326c3b81 into 46ffbd52).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-14T20:19:18Z
thanks for the updates, this PR looks fine to me. @bschussek ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-05-16T06:45:51Z
@Herzult can you squash your commits ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by travisbot at 2012-05-16T11:20:44Z
This pull request [passes](http://travis-ci.org/symfony/symfony/builds/1344811) (merged 3a5e84f4 into 58b6ef23).
[Validator] Rename constraint Size to Range
[Validator] Rename constraint CollectionSize to Size
[Validator] Merge the SizeLength into the Size constraint
[Validator] Update messages in Size constraint for consistancy
[Validator] Add english and french translation for Size messages
[Validator] Tweak expected types for exceptions in SizeValidator
[Validator] Fix CS in SizeValidator
[Validator] Update the ValidatorTypeGuesser
[Validator] Tweak SizeValidator
[Validator] Update CHANGELOG
[Validator] Complete previous CHANGELOG updates
[Form] Update validator type guesser
[Validator] Pluralize collection size english messages
[Validator] Pluralize Size french messages
Commits
-------
95727ff [OptionsResolver] Updated PHP requirements to 5.3.3
1c5f6c7 [OptionsResolver] Fixed issues mentioned in the PR comments
d60626e [OptionsResolver] Fixed clear() and remove() method in Options class
2b46975 [OptionsResolver] Fixed Options::replace() method
16f7d20 [OptionsResolver] Improved implementation and clarity of the Options class
6ce68b1 [OptionsResolver] Removed reference to non-existing property
9c76750 [OptionsResolver] Fixed doc and block nesting
876fd9b [OptionsResolver] Implemented fluid interface
95454f5 [OptionsResolver] Fixed typos
256b708 [OptionsParser] Renamed OptionsParser to OptionsResolver
04522ca [OptionsParser] Added method replaceDefaults()
b9d053e [Form] Moved Options classes to new OptionsParser component
Discussion
----------
Extracted OptionsResolver component out of Form
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: -
Todo: -
This PR refactors the options-related code of the Form component into a separate component. See the README file for usage examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-04-17T18:11:03Z
To me it seems like we have some redundancy with the Config/Definition component. I'm wondering if these two can/should be merged somehow?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by kriswallsmith at 2012-04-17T18:14:44Z
I would also suggest merging this into the Config component. Its current name too closely resembles Python's optparser lib, which could create confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-17T18:18:49Z
Merge conflict artifacts are fixed now.
@schmittjoh Do we? Isn't the idea of the Config component to read complex configuration from different configuration providers? (YAML, XML, Annotations etc.)
The idea of this parser is to be highly performant and to be usable in simple classes. If this can be achieved with the Config component, I'm happy to learn more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by schmittjoh at 2012-04-17T18:27:08Z
The config component is basically a super intelligent version of array_merge and the like.
About performance, I haven't really done any tests to say something about the impact. I think it's safe to say that it would be at least slower than your implementation in its current form due to the additional indirection. However, we could probably add a caching layer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-17T18:31:22Z
Have you checked the README I wrote? Are you sure the Config component is intended for the same purpose and not *way* too complex in this case?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-17T18:51:14Z
You also forgot to update the ``replace`` section of the root composer.json file.
And regarding doing such thing with the Config Definition stuff, it would be more difficult: it builds the tree of values with their defaults, and then merges stuff coming from different sources. The form component however receives defaults from different places (which also define the allowed keys at the same time) and then receives user options only once. And it needs to handle easily default values which depend from other values. So I think both implementations are useful for different needs (however, we could argue about making it a subnamespace in the Config component, but this would add yet another different stuff in it)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jalliot at 2012-04-17T18:58:03Z
@bschussek You need to add this component to the main composer.json too.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lsmith77 at 2012-04-18T06:54:17Z
doesn't this overlap a bit with the ``TreeBuilder`` in the Config component?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lsmith77 at 2012-04-18T06:59:12Z
ah just saw @stof's comment .. i think the biggest argument against TreeBuilder is that it was designed for a very specific purpose and performance wasn't one of them. where as Form needs something that performs fast. so yeah i do see different use cases, but i don't think this means we should have a new component.
furthermore while i haven't read the code in details i am surprised it doesn't make use of http://php.net/manual/en/function.array-replace-recursive.php to merge defaults into a user supplied options array.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-18T08:10:49Z
@stof, @jalliot: Fixed.
> furthermore while i haven't read the code in details i am surprised it doesn't make use of http://php.net/manual/en/function.array-replace-recursive.php to merge defaults into a user supplied options array.
@lsmith77: Because that's not what this component does. The key feature of this component is to resolve default values of options that depend on the *concrete* values of other options. I invite you to read the README.
Is it a good idea to merge this into Config? I think that both components address different audiences and different purposes. The idea of this one is to initialize classes with simple, run-time provided arrays. The idea of Config is to load and validate complex configurations from storage providers, such as the filesystem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-18T08:18:48Z
Note: Not all relevant code of this component is shown in the diff. The (crucial) Options and LazyOption classes have only been moved out of Form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by lsmith77 at 2012-04-18T08:20:02Z
> Is it a good idea to merge this into Config? I think that both components address different audiences and different purposes. The idea of this one is to initialize classes with simple, run-time provided arrays. The idea of Config is to load and validate complex configuration values from the filesystem (typically).
decoupled is all fine, but to me this feels a bit too granular. but i am just expressing a gut feeling here
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jalliot at 2012-04-18T08:34:03Z
I think too it should be included in the config component (maybe in a subnamespace). Indeed the behaviour is too different to be merged into the current component but its purpose is similar and is all about *configuration* (hence the name of the component). Otherwise we could also split the current Config component into smaller components as it seems to me there are already parts of it that are totally unrelated to each other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-18T11:30:55Z
@jalliot Can you go into detail which parts that are and what changes you suggest?
@kriswallsmith Any other naming suggestion?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by jalliot at 2012-04-18T11:34:35Z
@bschussek I don't know the current component well enough but that's the impression I had last time I looked at its code but I may be wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-18T19:30:43Z
@bschussek the Definition subnamespace of the Config component is standalone. It is not directly related to the Loader part
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-19T09:32:48Z
@stof So what do you recommend?
I think this is also a question of marketing. Is the Definition subnamespace intended to be used totally separately of the loaders? What are the use cases? If there are good use cases, it makes sense to me to extract the Definition part into a separate component. Otherwise not.
It is also a question of marketing, because the purpose of a component should be communicable in simple words (quoting @fabpot). The purpose of Config is (copied from the README):
> Config provides the infrastructure for loading configurations from different data sources and optionally monitoring these data sources for changes. There are additional tools for validating, normalizing and handling of defaults that can optionally be used to convert from different formats to arrays.
I think this purpose is completely different than that of OptionsParser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-19T11:39:50Z
The current description itself shows the current state: what is advocated as the main goal of the component (and was the original part) is the loader stuff. But the Definition part (mentioned as "additional tools") is bigger in term of LOC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-19T11:55:17Z
@stof: Yes, this is a fact, but what's your opinion? How do we proceed with this PR?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-19T12:21:44Z
Well, my opinion is that the current Config component may deserve to be split into 2 components (as someone may need only part of it). But this would be a huge BC break. @fabpot what do you think ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-23T10:14:57Z
@fabpot Can we merge this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-05-10T06:45:20Z
@bschussek I'm +1 for this PR but as mentioned by @kriswallsmith, we must find another name as `OptionsParser` immediately make me think of something related to the CLI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-05-10T06:47:45Z
However, after thinking about it again, I would vote for keeping it in its own component instead of adding yet another independant part in Config, to avoid forcing Form users to get the whole Config component
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-05-10T09:09:36Z
I'm having difficulties finding a better name. The main difference to CLI option parsers is that these actualy *parse* a string, while this class only receives an array of options (does not do any parsing). Otherwise both have the same purpose.
A couple of other suggestions:
* OptionsLoader (likely confused with our filesystem loaders)
* OptionsResolver
* OptionsMerger
* OptionsMatcher (not accurate)
* OptionsBuilder (likely confused with the builder pattern)
* OptionsJoiner
* OptionsBag (likely confused with the session bags)
* OptionsConfig (likely confused with Config)
* OptionsDefinition (likely confused with Config\Definition)
* OptionsSpec
* OptionsCombiner
* OptionsInitializer
* OptionsComposer
The difficulty is to find a name that best reflects its purpose:
```
$parser->setDefaults(...);
$parser->setRequired(...);
$parser->setOptional(...);
$parser->setAllowedValues(...)
$parser->parse($userOptions);
```
The only of the above examples that makes sense to me here is OptionsResolver -> resolve($userOptions).
Ideas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-05-10T09:56:54Z
OptionsResolver seems a better name than OptionsParser
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by luxifer at 2012-05-10T09:59:45Z
Agree with @stof
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by r1pp3rj4ck at 2012-05-10T10:03:53Z
I don't really like the plural in the name, but OptionsResolver seems better than OptionsParser. OptionResolver maybe?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by sstok at 2012-05-10T10:10:14Z
@r1pp3rj4ck Options makes more sense as they can be nested/deeper, and thus are multiple.
Agree with @stof also.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by r1pp3rj4ck at 2012-05-10T10:13:01Z
@sstok well, we have multiple events too and the name is EventDispatcher, not EventsDispatcher. Actually none of the component names are plural.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by newicz at 2012-05-10T10:33:50Z
OptionsResolver - I find it suggesting that there is some kind of problem to be resolved and there's not,
maybe OptionsDefiner but it isn't good aswell this is a tough one
Commits
-------
c195957 [Components] Tests/Autoloading fixes
Discussion
----------
Fix components
See #4141
----
This PR:
* configures each component to use composer to manage "dev" dependencies instead of env variables;
* adds phpunit configuration file on Filesystem component;
* fixes READMEs.
It's mergeable without any problems, but I would recommend to wait a fix in Composer in order to use `self.version` in `require`/`require-dev` sections.
Note: I kept `suggest` sections because it makes sense but this PR doesn't aim to provide useful explanations for each entry. It could be another PR, not that one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by willdurand at 2012-04-30T20:43:13Z
@fabpot I reviewed each component, one by one. Now `phpunit` always works, even if tests are skipped. A simple `composer install --dev` allows to run the complete test suite. Each commit is well separated from the others. I guess, everything is ok now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-30T20:47:00Z
Please squash, as it makes no sense to have the same commit for each component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-05-01T14:26:11Z
Can you squash your commits before I merge? Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by willdurand at 2012-05-01T14:29:38Z
done
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-05-01T15:48:25Z
It does not seem that the commits are squashed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by willdurand at 2012-05-01T15:54:08Z
done
* Switched to Composer to manage "dev" dependencies
* Fixed READMEs
* Excluded vendor in phpunit.xml.dist files
* Fixed message in bootstrap.php files
* Added autoloader for the component itself
Commits
-------
246c885 [Form] Fixed: Default value of 'error_bubbling' is now determined by the 'single_control' option
d3bb4d0 [Form] Renamed option 'primitive' to 'single_control'
167e64f [Form] Fixed: Field attributes are not rendered in the label anymore. Label attributes are now passed in "label_attr"
68018a1 [Form] Dropped useless test that is guaranteed by OptionsParser tests and that needs to be adapted very often
649752c [Form] Fixed: CSRF token was not displayed on empty complex forms
c623fcf [Form] Fixed: CSRF protection did not run if token was missing
eb75ab1 [Form] Fixed results of the FieldType+FormType merge.
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed errors introduced in the FieldType+FormType merge
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: yes
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3994, #4000, #2294, #4118
Todo: -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-22T15:39:20Z
`primitive` is a pretty abstract option name. It depends on the person what he considers primitive. Maybe more explicit naming or better documentation what it means.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-22T15:47:29Z
Better suggestions?
The distinction here is between primitive and complex forms, where primitive forms are such forms that can be represented by a single HTML tag. This obviously needs to be documented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-22T15:49:45Z
Maybe `single_widget` or something like that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-23T13:09:43Z
@Tobion @bschussek would `elementary` be better than `primitive` ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-23T13:17:04Z
and `compound \ composite` better than `complex` ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-23T14:08:33Z
@vicb I fail to see how elementary/compound is easier to understand than primitive/complex. Maybe single_widget, but what's the opposite of this case? multi_widget?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-23T14:15:09Z
Actually I am fine with anything... as long as it is documented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-23T14:22:31Z
Still I think that this unveals a more profound naming problem. How do we (also in the documentation) name forms with children (formerly "forms") and forms without children (formerly "fields")?
Should we refer to them as
* forms and fields?
* complex and primitive forms?
* ...
We must first answer this question before we can find an intuitive option name. If the documentation always switches between different terminologies, neither will it be understandable nor will this option be easy to remember.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by vicb at 2012-04-23T15:10:32Z
> Still I think that this unveals a more profound naming problem. How do we (also in the documentation) name forms with children (formerly "forms") and forms without children (formerly "fields")?
To make it clear, I would rather say forms that **can have** children and forms that **can not have** children (i.e. Empty collections have no children but they can have and this is reason why you have to introduce those options, right ? - that could be a good example for the doc).
It will probably be better to refer to "complex" / "primitive" forms in the doc (and use the "form" / "field" terms to explain them).
Note: I think @Tobion concern is that "primitive" / "complex" could be pejorative terms (this is why I have proposed "elementary" / "compound").
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-23T16:00:54Z
1. primitive/complex is subjective (and could be pejorative too)
2. elementary/compound is more explicit so probably better than primitive/complex
3. I dislike this option in general. Does it make sense to change this option from a user perspective? I guess it's always the same as long as the widget structure stays the same. So it should be resolved at a higher level dynamically from the widget structure and not exposed to any configuration.
4. In documentation I would use the terms forms and fields. Because all people with HTML knowledge will understand that fields cannot have sub-fields whereas forms can. But since this distinction is not findable in code, it should be mentioned that all these are implemented as a form hierarchy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by mvrhov at 2012-04-23T16:02:00Z
how about simple and complex?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-23T16:06:33Z
@Tobion It does not make sense to change this option from the user perspective, still the overloading type has to propagate to FormType whether it is a form or a field, so that the default behaviour is correct.
A second option how to implement this is to add a method `isField` to FormTypeInterface that can be overloaded and receives the options. I don't really like to introduce new methods here unless absolutely required.
What about renaming the option "primitive" to "is_field"? The blocks in the template would then be named "form_widget_field" and "form_widget_form".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by tristanbes at 2012-04-25T14:01:06Z
Oh, I should've seen this before, i thought I was doing something wrong. (empty collections gets an input field bug)
Please big :UP: on this. When will it be merged ? @bschussek
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-25T15:30:28Z
+1 for "is_field" and "form_widget_field" but I would rather use "form_widget_compound" instead of "form_widget_form" which is quite strange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-26T16:34:04Z
@Tobion "simple" and "compound" then?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-26T16:49:58Z
no "field" and "compound"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-26T17:17:02Z
I don't like "field" for a simple reason: Consider the "date" type. We are typically speaking of the "date" field there. But technically, the "date" field is a compound field. So?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-26T21:17:37Z
I don't understand the open question. You proposed "is_field" and "form_widget_field" yourself. So calling the template block "form_widget_field" is a comprehensible consequence of "is_field". I wouldn't call the date type with multiple inputs a field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by tristanbes at 2012-04-26T21:52:39Z
We should take a decision cause right here i got all my forms that are broken because of the empty collection rendering as input field :-).
I guess we are many in that situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-27T08:28:16Z
I renamed "primitive" to "single_control" now to match with the HTML specification which names all input elements (input, select etc.) "controls". The opposite is now "compound".
Meanwhile, I added a fix for #4118.
@fabpot This is ready for merge now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Tobion at 2012-04-27T10:22:49Z
Hm, I know naming things is hard and sometimes not really important. But since users need to know which block to override, it is essential to make it clear. I think there is still one issue.
The block is named `form_widget_single_control` in order, as you said, to abstract away if it's an input, select etc. But in fact it can only render `input` and nothing else. So this is misleading.
So you could also simply name it `form_widget_input`.
Apart from that I agree with everything.
