Rely on fields when validating submitted values on sample creation #2307
Conversation
xispa
changed the title
| return datetime.now() | ||
| two_months = getattr(widget, "datepicker_2months", False) | ||
| if self.is_true(two_months): | ||
| return datetime.now() + relativedelta(months=2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where do we have this in place? Not sure if this is possible at all with the current native HTML 5 date widget.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was present in 1.3.x, not in 2.x. Just removed this with 9823c4c
|
Wouldn't it make more sense to call a field validator for these date fields and move the logic in there? The reason is that field validators should be called from the JSON API as well: |
Probably yes. Let me try and see |
xispa
changed the title
xispa
changed the title
| return ansi | ||
| return "{}{:02d}{:02d}{:02d}".format(ansi, dt.hour, dt.minute, dt.second) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better use strftime from the datetime module:
In [1]: from datetime import datetime
In [2]: now = datetime.now()
In [3]: now.strftime("%Y%m%d%H%M")
Out[3]: '202305110732'| # is offset-aware. We need to add the TZ, otherwise we get a: | ||
| # TypeError: can't compare offset-naive and offset-aware datetimes | ||
| if dtime.to_ansi(value) >= dtime.to_ansi(self.min): | ||
| return None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, ANSI times can be compared as strings, then it's fine like this.
| datetime.datetime(1, 1, 1, 0, 0) | ||
|
|
||
| >>> dtime.to_ansi(min_date) | ||
| '00010101000000' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, got it. Therefore you format the date manually:
In [9]: dt = datetime.strptime("1000-01-01", "%Y-%m-%d")
In [10]: dt.strftime("%Y%m%d%H%M")
ValueError: year=1000 is before 1900; the datetime strftime() methods require year >= 1900
…#2308) * Validate no-future dates when submitting Add sample * Validate both past and future dates * Include 2.x's `datetime_ng` (just in case) * Changelog * Use field validator instead * Return immediately if we have no value and the field is not required
Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses
This Pull Request ensures that values submitted in sample add form are validated in accordance with the field types and the validators assigned.
Although the Date/Time widget does not display future dates when the widget is configured with the option
no_future, user can easily bypass this by typing a future date manually in the input field:This Pull Request guarantees that even if the date is typed manually, the entered value is consistent with the widget configuration.
Current behavior before PR
User can manually enter future dates for e.g. DateSampled in Add sample form
Desired behavior after PR is merged
System complains if the date entered is not valid
--
I confirm I have tested this PR thoroughly and coded it according to PEP8
and Plone's Python styleguide standards.