Re: Fix for RM2421 [pgAdmin4][patch]

Hi,

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Joao Pedro De Almeida Pereira <
jdealmeidapereira(at)pivotal(dot)io> wrote:

> Hello Harshal,
>
> We review the patch and have some questions:
> 1) Is there any particular reason to initialize variables and functions in
> the same place? We believe that it would be more readable there were no
> chaining of variable creation, specially if those variables are functions.
> Check line:
>
That function is only going to be used in checkNumeric function (in case of
Number control) and checkInt function (in case of Integer control) so
declared them locally.
Anyway I'm going to refactor both the controls as Number and Integer shares
some common properties.

+++ b/web/pgadmin/static/js/backform.pgadmin.js
> @@ -1528,7 +1528,18 @@
> max_value = field.max,
> isValid = true,
> intPattern = new RegExp("^-?[0-9]*$"),
> - isMatched = intPattern.test(value);
> + isMatched = intPattern.test(value),
> + trigger_invalid_event = function(msg) {
>
> ​
> 2) The functions added in both places look very similar, can they be
> merged and extracted? We are talking about the trigger_invalid_event
> function.
>
Yes they can be merged. As of now both NumericControl and IntegerControl
are derived from InputControl. Ideally
only NumericControl should be derived from InputControl and IntegerControl
should be derive from NumericControl.

> 3) The following change is very similar to the trigger_invalid_event, was
> there a reason not to use it?
>
Below code triggers "model valid" event; opposite to "model invalid" event (
trigger_invalid_event)

> +++ b/web/pgadmin/static/js/backform.pgadmin.js
> @@ -1573,25 +1584,23 @@
> this.model.errorModel.unset(name);
> this.model.set(name, value);
> this.listenTo(this.model, "change:" + name, this.render);
> - if (this.model.collection || this.model.handler) {
> - (this.model.collection || this.model.handler).trigger(
> - 'pgadmin-session:model:valid', this.model, (this.model.collection || this.model.handler)
> - );
> + // Check if other fields of same model are valid before
> + // triggering 'session:valid' event
> + if(_.size(this.model.errorModel.attributes) == 0) {
> + if (this.model.collection || this.model.handler) {
> + (this.model.collection || this.model.handler).trigger(
> + 'pgadmin-session:model:valid', this.model, (this.model.collection || this.model.handler)
> + );
> + } else {
> + (this.model).trigger(
> + 'pgadmin-session:valid', this.model.sessChanged(), this.model
> + );
> + }
>
> ​
> 4) We also noticed that the following change sets look very similiar. Is
> there any reason to have this code duplicated? If not this could be a good
> time to refactor it.
>
As said earlier in response of point 2 code duplication is because the way
controls are derived.

> +++ b/web/pgadmin/static/js/backform.pgadmin.js
> @@ -1528,7 +1528,18 @@
>
> @@ -1573,25 +1584,23 @@
>
> @@ -1631,7 +1640,18 @@
>
> @@ -1676,25 +1696,23 @@
>
> ​
>
> Thanks
> Joao & Shruti
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 6:01 AM, Harshal Dhumal <
> harshal(dot)dhumal(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please find attached patch for RM2421
>>
>> Issue fixed: 1. Integer/numeric Validation is not working properly.
>> 2. Wrong CPU rate unit
>> --
>> *Harshal Dhumal*
>> *Sr. Software Engineer*
>>
>> EnterpriseDB India: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
>>
>>
>