I have to explain the way react-date-picker auto-correct the date when enter raw string into input.
For example, I tried on the demo site of react-date-picker. (https://reactdatepicker.com/)
I typed 2019ab12 after blur by tab, I got the result 01/01/2019
I typed 222 after blur by tab, I got the result 02/01/2019
I typed 4444 after blur by tab, I got the result 01/01/444
I can figure out the logic in some cases I've tried, but it is insufficient to confirm about the logic because my customers tried many cases and ask the question, What kind of logic that we applied to turn the invalid date to the valid one
My question is, does it (auto-correct behavior) follow any standard or it is just the implementation of this specific library.
For those who have same questions as mine, please read the moment docs, parsing section to know the logic.
URL: https://momentjs.com/guides/#/parsing/.
Related
I've implemented a basic search functionality using freeSolo material-ui, but I have a trouble when my array has two same titles. When I attempt to type 'a' I strangely get Woolies as one of the option. When you click elsewhere within the application and click on search box again, I get the correct output.
Confused how can I get rid of this bug.
Screenshot 1
Screenshot 2
REPO URL: https://stackblitz.com/edit/react-ovvfuz?file=demo.tsx
Any help would be greatly appreciated :)
I'm new to using react-hook-form and after lots of research I stil cannot understand what I'm I doing wrong. I did a sandbox in which I have a simple input number.
How I would like my form to behave : I want the default value (16) to show and I want the errors below the input to show when the number does not respect the given rules (when the number is not between 16-99).
Can someone please help me understand? I'm going crazy! :s
Here is the sandbox link : https://codesandbox.io/s/crazy-northcutt-8wt6p?file=/src/App.tsx
Change the value of TextField's value to render's parameter value. Also add submit button in order the validation work.
I've forked your code for detailed code
https://codesandbox.io/s/heuristic-fire-eroqv
Umbraco uses angularJS as based library and backoffice totally developed on it. The reason telling first is to tell that I have a field on which URL regular expression applied. If someone entered invalid url like below image
it shows error as need.
But if a user try to remove whole text by selecting it and removing at once. It still keep appearing the error like this
However, if a user erase text one by one like this
then the validation error removed and user need to click on button to see error again.
I would to know how screen 3 state can be achievable when user remove all text together? Its really annoying behavior for a user to remove text character one by one to refresh the state of the field. Screen 3 state should be applied on screen 2.
Can anybody tell me how it can fix or achievable? Right now, it seems like a default behavior.
Looking forward to hear from you guys. Suggestions will be much appreciatable.
Regards o
I've looked into this issue. This seems to be a product bug.
When you remove whole text at once, newValue is an empty string and the code responsible for resetting error messages doesn't run. If you have access to the umbraco code, you can easily fix it by removing highlighted check:
So, for example in database I have three users: Peter, John and Sara. There is a specific field, in which all three users can write.
Peter writes:
"I like apples"
, after that John appends with
" and I like bananas"
. Now I have field which says
"I like apples and I like bananas"
, so If I would like to display, which part was writen by whom, my approuch would be to create html tags:
The field would be:
<span class="text-sequence-1">I like apples</span><span class="text-sequence-2"> and I like bananas</span>
and then, from database I would pick the sentences by its order and using CSS on hover on display additional content, on each part of hover on.
1st problem. The problem is if, the third user, Sara, comes and
updates the text, which belongs to both original. Which can be
overcome if I allow to edit one by one Johns and Peters tags.
Then I get edited span inside of original spans and could track
which part was edited and how. If I did like this, I would still
face a second problem:
2nd problem. If Sara decides to edit, for example Johns part, a few
times. I would still get nested badly.
I could use something like #number tags instead of spans, so I can track where each edition ends, but then I couldn't apply CSS code to them to color which part belongs to who and apply additional effects on hover, like showing a box, who edited it and when.
Any ideas how could I implement it?
Sorry for my bad english.
Since you are using a database, keep track of the edits in a separate table. For each edit, keep the following fields:
row-ID of this edit (primary key)
the parent row-ID (the row-ID of the "current edit" when the edit was started/confirmed; see below for how to use)
the author that edited things
the time-stamp
an optional short text describing what was changed (for example, "fixed spelling")
When showing the field, you can then display a link to a "history", that would show who edited what when. You can show individual differences between any two versions such as Wikipedia does when you look at the history of a page - there are many libraries to do that, with highlighting and all. This library seems nice, but there are many others, in all sorts of languages.
When someone starts to edit, let them modify the then-current version (highest time-stamp). When they commit their edit (click accept or similar), check again to see that nobody else has changed things while they were editing (the time-stamp of the parent edit is still highest). If someone did change something, show them the difference between your parent-row and the edit, and tell them to fix things before committing (there may be several edits to take into account). This is the "wikipedia way", and it amounts to a sort of lightweight version control (much easier to implement than, say, Git)
Acually I think that this approach is not good. As you noticed you will get alot of nasty nestings.
What if somone edits only one letter?
Instead of that, think about line comparison approach. Like Git does. So compare if first line changed and store each version.( More sophisticated way would be only storing lines that changed and applying changes like git patches.)
I think your way is destined to fail. It's far way too complex and there is no logical comparision method to be used.
John is cool
John is uncool
John is Uncool
John is weak
Think how you would tag those. What if somone deletes piece of text? Edit will not be visible or u will insert an empty tag (which will not be visible)?
Dont tag, compare. Tagging is not what you're looking for i think. Also please see: Text comparison algorithm
Okay, this is driving me nuts. I’m working through the IBM CakePHP Tutorial, and in the first part, I’m at the section where the author is introducing validation rules for form input:
www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/tutorials/os-php-cake1/section5.html#N107E3
For the life of me, I can’t figure out what’s happening in this line of code:
$this->invalidate('username_unique');
According to the CakePHP documentation, the Model::invalidate() method takes as its first parameter a string that specifiies “The name of the field to invalidate”. How is “username_unique” the name of the field to validate? Looks to me like it should be just plain old “username”. But incredibly enough, the author’s code works, and mine doesn’t when I change “username_unique” to “username” (or even “User.username”), so I’m thinking there might be a serious flaw in the documentation (or very possibly, with me).
[FWIW, I can see that the CakePHP 1.25 provides a better means of doing validation, but I still find it troubling that what seems to be a well-documented method doesn't seem to be doing what it advertises, and I want to understand why the tutorial code works.]
Can anyone shed any light on this?
The "magic" is actually in the $form in this case.
When calling $this->invalidate('username_unique'), Cake takes a note that the field username_unique is invalid. The fact that this field does not actually exist is irrelevant.
Now, take another look at the actual $form field (slightly reformatted):
echo $form->input('username', array(
'after' => $form->error('username_unique', 'The username is taken. Please try again.')
));
It's outputting a normal form field, but "manually" places an error() output after the form field. $form->error('username_unique', $message) means "if there's an error for the field username_unique, output the message $message". So you're actually marking an imaginary field as invalid and are manually outputting an error message for this imaginary field.
And actually, that's a load of outdated cr*p you should forget right away. There's a built-in syntax for multiple validation rules per field, so you can test for character length and uniqueness at the same time and even get different error messages for each error type. There's even a built-in isUnique rule, so you won't even have to code a manual uniqueness test.