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.
Commits
-------
8bdff01 [DoctrineBridge][Form] added collection guess for array Doctrine type and array constraint type
Discussion
----------
[Form] [DoctrineBridge] Better field type guessing for array doctrine type and array validator type
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #1692
Todo: -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-18T08:45:17Z
Could you please add an entry to the CHANGELOG and squash your commits into one?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by pvanliefland at 2012-04-18T17:20:39Z
Done
CSRF fields are now only added when the view is built. For this reason we already know if
the form is the root form and avoid to create unnecessary CSRF fields for nested fields.
Commits
-------
be2456b [Form] [Tests] Used assertCount()
4120f13 [Form] Added all() method to the FormBuilder class
Discussion
----------
[Form] Added all() method to the FormBuilder class
In order to perform some introspection on a FormBuilder instance,
we need to be able to get its children. Almost everything is accessible
in this class, but the children are not.
This PR adds a all() method to respect the current API (get(), remove(),
...).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-12T09:54:04Z
👍
In order to perform some introspection on a FormBuilder instance,
we need to be able to get its children. Almost everything is accessible
in this class, but the children are not.
This PR adds a all() method to respect the current API (get(), remove(),
...).
Commits
-------
8329087 [Form] Moved calculation of ChoiceType options to closures
5adec19 [Form] Fixed typos
cb87ccb [Form] Failing test for empty_data option BC break
b733045 [Form] Fixed option support in Form component
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed option support in Form component
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: yes
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3354, #3512, #3685, #3694
Todo: -
This PR also introduces a new helper `DefaultOptions` for solving option graphs. It accepts default options to be defined on various layers of your class hierarchy. These options can then be merged with the options passed by the user. This is called *resolving*.
The important feature of this utility is that it lets you define *lazy options*. Lazy options are specified using closures that are evaluated when resolving and thus have access to the resolved values of other (potentially lazy) options. The class detects cyclic option dependencies and fails with an exception in this case.
For more information, check the inline documentation of the `DefaultOptions` class and the UPGRADE file.
@fabpot: Might this be worth a separate component? (in total the utility consists of five classes with two associated tests)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by beberlei at 2012-04-05T08:54:10Z
"The important feature of this utility is that it lets you define lazy options. Lazy options are specified using closures"
What about options that are closures? are those differentiated?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-05T08:57:35Z
@beberlei Yes. Closures for lazy options receive a Symfony\Component\Form\Options instance as first argument. All other closures are interpreted as normal values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-05T11:09:49Z
I'm wondering if these classes should go in the Config component. My issue with it is that it would add a required dependency to the Config component and that the Config component mixes many different things in it already (the loader part, the resource part, the definition part...)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by sstok at 2012-04-06T13:36:36Z
Sharing the Options class would be great, and its more then one class so why not give it its own Component folder?
Filesystem is just one class, and that has its own folder.
Great job on the class bschussek 👏
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-10T12:32:34Z
@fabpot Any input?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-10T13:54:13Z
@fabpot Apart from the decision about the final location of DefaultOptions et al., could you merge this soon? This would make my work a bit easier since this one is a blocker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2012-04-10T18:08:18Z
@bschussek: Can you rebase on master? I will merge afterwards. Thanks.
This demonstrates the issue described in symfony/symfony#3354. FieldType no longer has access to the child type's data_class option, which makes it unable to create the default closure for empty_data.
Commits
-------
f9a486e [Validator] Added support for pluralization of the SizeLengthValidator
c0715f1 [FrameworkBundle], [TwigBundle] added support for form error message pluralization
7a6376e [Form] added support for error message pluralization
345981f [Validator] added support for plural messages
Discussion
----------
[Validator] Added support for plural error messages
Bug fix: no
Feature addition: yes
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Todo: create translations for en and update others (FrameworkBundle)
[](http://travis-ci.org/hason/symfony)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by fabpot at 2011-05-14T20:41:01Z
@bschussek: What's your opinion?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2011-09-04T13:14:29Z
@hason could you rebase your branch on top of master and update the PR ?
You also need to change the messages in the constraint that uses the pluralization to a pluralized format.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2011-10-16T18:06:22Z
@hason ping
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2011-11-11T14:58:19Z
@hason ping again
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2011-12-12T20:39:10Z
@hason ping again. Can you update your PR ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by hason at 2011-12-12T21:29:14Z
@stof I hope that I will update PR this week.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-01-15T19:07:32Z
Looks good to me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by canni at 2012-02-02T17:28:54Z
@hason can you update this PR and squash commits, it conflicts with current master
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by hason at 2012-02-09T07:21:41Z
@stof, @canni Rebased.
What is the best solution for the translation of messages?
1. Change messages in the classes and all xliff files?
2. Keep messages in the classes and change all xliff files?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-02-09T08:19:41Z
The constraints contain the en message so you will need to modify them to update the message
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by hason at 2012-02-09T08:55:55Z
I prefer second option. The Validator component should be decoupled from the Translation component. The constraints contain the en message which is also the key for Translation component. We should create validators.en.xlf in the FrameworkBundle for en message. I think that this is better solution. What do you think?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-04T02:22:02Z
@hason Please rebase your branch. It conflicts with master because of the move of the tests
@fabpot ping
Commits
-------
c4e68a3 [Form] Moved logic of addXxx()/removeXxx() methods to the PropertyPath class
Discussion
----------
[Form] Moved logic of addXxx()/removeXxx() methods to the PropertyPath class
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3732
Todo: -
The addXxx()/removeXxx() methods should now be called correctly in ChoiceType and CollectionType.
PropertyPath now favors addXxx()/removeXxx() over setXxx() for collections. For example:
```
$propertyPath = new PropertyPath('article.tags');
// Tries to use addTag()/removeTag() and only uses setTags() (et al.)
// if not found
$propertyPath->setValue($article, $tags);
```
For other languages than English or very irregular plurals, a custom singular can be set by separating it with a pipe:
```
$propertyPath = new PropertyPath('article.genera|genus');
```
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-07T12:40:39Z
Again, the failing build is not my fault.
Commits
-------
61d792e [Form] Changed checkboxes in an expanded multiple-choice field to not include the choice index
bc9bc4a [Form] Fixed behavior of expanded multiple-choice field when submitted without ticks
2e07256 [Form] Simplified choice list API
2645120 [Form] Fixed handling of expanded choice lists, checkboxes and radio buttons with empty values ("")
Discussion
----------
[Form] Fixed handling of empty values in checkbox/radio/choice type
Bug fix: yes
Feature addition: no
Backwards compatibility break: no
Symfony2 tests pass: yes
Fixes the following tickets: #3839, #3366
Todo: -
This PR fixes the processing of checkboxes and radio buttons with empty "value" attributes as well as of expanded choice forms with empty values. Additionally, some unnecessary complexity has been removed of the new ChoiceList API.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-10T13:56:12Z
You probably need to change some things in the CHANGELOG file too
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-10T14:39:24Z
No. This is an update of a previous post-2.0 PR, the CHANGELOG is still accurate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by stof at 2012-04-10T14:46:47Z
well, doesn't it require changes to the description of previous changes related to the ChoiceList ? It does in the UPGRADE file so it is weird if the CHANGELOG does not require any change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by bschussek at 2012-04-10T14:56:05Z
Feel free to check yourself :)
Setting a property path like "article.tags" will now automatically try to
favor addTag() and removeTag() over setTags(), if found. If you want to
set up a property path with an irregular singular that is not detected,
you can use "|" to separate the plural from the singular form in the
path: "article.genera|genus".
Another consequence of this commit is that the MergeCollectionListener has
been simplified a lot. Forms returning an array or a collection will
always result in adders/removers being called now without having to add
this listener.
