JNG-5985 readonly by #475
JNG-5985 readonly by #475
Conversation
noherczeg
commented
Oct 22, 2024
•
noherczeg
commented
 JNG-5985 Add readonlyBy hook for inputs
|
noherczeg
requested review from
robertcsakany,
bencegelei,
gaborflorian and
Madmat8
WalkthroughThe changes involve significant updates to various components in the judo-ui-react application, primarily focusing on the logic for determining the Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (11)
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/timeinput.hbs (1)
54-55: LGTM! Consider improving readability with line breaks.The implementation correctly enhances the readonly/disabled logic by introducing dynamic action-based checks while maintaining fallback behavior. This aligns well with the PR objectives.
Consider improving readability by breaking down the long expressions:
- readOnly={actions?.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Readonly ? actions.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Readonly(data, editMode, isLoading) : ({{ boolValue child.attributeType.isReadOnly }} || !isFormUpdateable())} - disabled={actions?.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Disabled ? actions.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Disabled(data, editMode, isLoading) : ({{# if child.enabledBy }}!data.{{ child.enabledBy.name }} ||{{/ if }} isLoading)} + readOnly={ + actions?.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Readonly + ? actions.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Readonly(data, editMode, isLoading) + : ({{ boolValue child.attributeType.isReadOnly }} || !isFormUpdateable()) + } + disabled={ + actions?.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Disabled + ? actions.is{{ firstToUpper child.attributeType.name }}Disabled(data, editMode, isLoading) + : ({{# if child.enabledBy }}!data.{{ child.enabledBy.name }} ||{{/ if }} isLoading) + }judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/Planet/View/PlanetView.tsx.snapshot (2)
113-115: Simplify the readOnly fallback logic.The current fallback condition
false || !isFormUpdateable()can be simplified as it's equivalent to just!isFormUpdateable(). Thefalse ||part is redundant and makes the code less readable.Consider this cleaner implementation:
readOnly: actions?.isNameReadonly ? actions.isNameReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable(), + : !isFormUpdateable(),
113-115: Consider documenting the action interface pattern.The dynamic readOnly state management through action methods is a good pattern. To ensure maintainability and consistency across the codebase, consider documenting the
isNameReadonlyaction interface in thePlanetViewContainerHooktype definition, including:
- Expected parameters and their types
- Return type
- Usage examples
- Edge cases
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/types.ts.hbs (1)
37-37: Consider documenting the readonly behavior contract.Since this template generates TypeScript interfaces that define the contract for readonly behavior across components, consider:
- Adding JSDoc comments to document the expected behavior and usage of the readonly property
- Creating usage examples in the component documentation
- Defining test cases that verify the readonly state handling
This will help maintain consistency as the feature evolves.
judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/Form/ViewGalaxyForm.tsx.snapshot (2)
370-374: LGTM: Successfully adapted for DateTimePicker with minor formatting suggestionThe readOnly logic is correctly implemented for the DateTimePicker component. Consider maintaining consistent single-line formatting as used in other fields for better code uniformity.
- readOnly={ - actions?.isDiscoveredReadonly - ? actions.isDiscoveredReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable() - } + readOnly={actions?.isDiscoveredReadonly ? actions.isDiscoveredReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) : false || !isFormUpdateable()}
Line range hint
134-374: Excellent architectural implementation of dynamic field controlThe implementation successfully achieves a more granular control over field states by:
- Introducing field-specific action methods for readOnly state
- Maintaining backward compatibility with isFormUpdateable
- Consistently applying the pattern across different input types
- Properly handling undefined actions through optional chaining
This architecture allows for more flexible and context-aware form field control while keeping the code clean and maintainable.
judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/View/ViewGalaxyView.tsx.snapshot (5)
250-252: Simplify the ternary expression forreadOnlypropertyThe expression
false || !isFormUpdateable()simplifies to!isFormUpdateable(). Simplifying the ternary operator enhances readability.Apply this diff to simplify the code:
readOnly: actions?.isNameReadonly ? actions.isNameReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable(), + : !isFormUpdateable(),
335-337: Simplify the ternary expression forreadOnlypropertyThe
false || !isFormUpdateable()expression can be simplified to!isFormUpdateable()for clarity.Apply this diff:
readOnly: actions?.isConstellationReadonly ? actions.isConstellationReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable(), + : !isFormUpdateable(),
381-383: Simplify the ternary expression forreadOnlypropertySimplify
false || !isFormUpdateable()to!isFormUpdateable()to improve readability.Apply this diff:
readOnly: actions?.isMagnitudeReadonly ? actions.isMagnitudeReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable(), + : !isFormUpdateable(),
461-463: Simplify the ternary expression forreadOnlypropertySimplifying
false || !isFormUpdateable()to!isFormUpdateable()makes the code more concise.Apply this diff:
readOnly: actions?.isOriginOfNameReadonly ? actions.isOriginOfNameReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable(), + : !isFormUpdateable(),
562-566: Simplify the ternary expression forreadOnlypropertyThe expression
false || !isFormUpdateable()simplifies to!isFormUpdateable(). Simplify it for better code clarity.Apply this diff:
readOnly: actions?.isDiscoveredReadonly ? actions.isDiscoveredReadonly(data, editMode, isLoading) - : false || !isFormUpdateable() + : !isFormUpdateable()
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
- judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/Planet/View/PlanetView.tsx.snapshot (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/Form/ViewGalaxyForm.tsx.snapshot (5 hunks)
- judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/View/ViewGalaxyView.tsx.snapshot (8 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/link/index.tsx.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/link/types.ts.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/types.ts.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/binarytypeinput.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/dateinput.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/datetimeinput.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/enumerationcombo.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/numericinput.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textarea.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textinput.hbs (2 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/timeinput.hbs (1 hunks)
- judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/trinarylogiccombo.hbs (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (17)
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/link/types.ts.hbs (1)
21-21: LGTM! The new readonly property follows established patterns.The addition of
is{{ firstToUpper link.relationType.name }}Readonly?maintains consistency with existing modifier properties and properly integrates with the template structure.Let's verify the template generates valid TypeScript code:
✅ Verification successful
Let's try a different approach to verify the readonly patterns in the codebase.
The previous search might have been too specific. These broader searches should help us understand:
- How readonly properties are typically defined in the codebase
- The naming conventions used for readonly-related properties
- How readonly is handled in template files
This will help us verify if the new property follows the established patterns in the codebase.
The search results show evidence of readonly patterns in the codebase, particularly in the template files. Let's verify one more aspect to ensure complete understanding of the pattern implementation.
This will help us:
- Confirm if other similar modifier functions follow the same pattern in the components
- See the complete context of the ActionDefinitions interface where the new property is being added
Based on the search results, I can now generate a final response. The evidence shows:
- The codebase uses readonly patterns consistently
- The ActionDefinitions interface already contains similar modifier patterns
- The component properly handles readonly states through props
- The template structure follows established patterns for generating TypeScript code
The readonly property addition is consistent with codebase patterns and correctly implemented
The new
is{{ firstToUpper link.relationType.name }}Readonly?property:
- Follows the established pattern seen in other components (e.g., in
binarytypeinput.hbs)- Integrates properly with the ActionDefinitions interface
- Is used alongside other state modifiers (disabled, readOnly) in the component props
- Generates TypeScript code that aligns with the codebase's type definitions
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the template generates valid TypeScript code # Expected: The generated code should follow the same pattern as other modifiers # Test: Check if other files use similar readonly patterns rg -g '*.ts' -A 2 'isReadonly.*=>.*boolean'Length of output: 45
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's search for readonly-related patterns more broadly # First, let's check for any readonly patterns in TypeScript files rg -g '*.ts' -i 'readonly.*boolean' # Also search for similar modifier patterns to understand the convention rg -g '*.ts' -i 'is.*readonly.*\?:' # Check template files for readonly patterns rg -g '*.hbs' 'readonly'Length of output: 2222
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check for similar modifier patterns in the same directory rg -g '*.hbs' 'is.*\?\:\s*\(\{.*\}\)\s*=>\s*boolean' ./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/ # Also check the specific link directory for context rg -A 5 'ActionDefinitions' ./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/link/Length of output: 3023
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/trinarylogiccombo.hbs (1)
33-33: Improved readonly state handling with dynamic action checks.The enhancement to use action-based readonly state determination is a good architectural improvement. It provides more flexibility by allowing dynamic readonly states based on runtime conditions while maintaining backward compatibility through the fallback logic.
Let's verify the consistency of this pattern across other components:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response as we have sufficient information to verify the consistency of the readonly pattern implementation.
Verified: Readonly pattern is consistently implemented across form components
The implementation of the dynamic readonly state is consistently applied across all relevant form components:
- textinput.hbs
- timeinput.hbs
- dateinput.hbs
- datetimeinput.hbs
- trinarylogiccombo.hbs
- link/index.tsx.hbs
All components follow the same pattern:
The implementation maintains consistency in:
- The function naming convention
- The parameters passed (data/ownerData, editMode, isLoading)
- The fallback logic pattern
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent implementation of readonly logic across components # Expected: All component templates should follow similar pattern for readonly props # Search for readonly property implementations in template files rg -g '*.hbs' 'readOnly=\{.*Readonly.*\}' ./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/ # Search for corresponding action definitions ast-grep --pattern 'interface $_ { $$$ is${_}Readonly?: ($$$) => boolean; $$$ }'Length of output: 2140
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textarea.hbs (1)
45-45: LGTM! Verify consistent implementation across components.The dynamic
readOnlyimplementation correctly integrates the new action-based approach while maintaining fallback behavior. This aligns well with the PR objectives for JNG-5985.Let's verify the consistent implementation of this pattern across other components:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results from the shell scripts, I can now generate the final response:
Implementation verified - consistent readonly pattern across components ✓
The dynamic
readOnlyimplementation is consistently applied across all form components:
- textinput
- textarea
- numericinput
- enumerationcombo
- trinarylogiccombo
- dateinput
- timeinput
- datetimeinput
All components follow the same pattern:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent implementation of readonly logic across components # Expected: Similar patterns using is{AttributeName}Readonly with data, editMode, and isLoading parameters # Search for readonly implementations in template files rg -t hbs "readOnly.*is.*Readonly.*data.*editMode.*isLoading" # Search for action method declarations ast-grep --pattern 'is$_Readonly($_, $_, $_)'Length of output: 3136
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/numericinput.hbs (1)
50-50: LGTM with suggestions for optimization.The dynamic readOnly state determination using action handlers is a good approach. However, consider the following recommendations:
- Ensure the generated action handlers are memoized to prevent unnecessary re-renders
- Consider caching the readOnly state if it's accessed frequently during renders
Let's verify the action handler implementations across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the implementation and memoization patterns.
The previous search patterns weren't specific enough. These new patterns should help us:
- Find actual usage of readonly handlers in templates
- Locate generated action handlers with useCallback
- Check action interface definitions
- Verify proper React hook imports and usage
This will give us better insight into the implementation patterns and memoization practices.
Let me fix the regex syntax and try one more time to verify the implementation patterns.
I've simplified the regex patterns and added more focused searches to:
- Find readonly patterns in templates
- Locate action handlers and memoization
- Check interface definitions
- Verify the broader usage of useCallback
- Identify all template files with readOnly properties
This should give us a better picture of the implementation patterns across the codebase.
Let me check the actual implementation in these template files to understand the readOnly pattern better.
This will help us:
- Examine the complete implementation of the numeric input component
- Compare with other input components to verify pattern consistency
- Check the action type definitions
- Understand how the readOnly handlers are typed and integrated
After analyzing the template files, I can now provide a conclusive response about the readOnly implementation.
Implementation is correct and follows consistent patterns across input components
The readOnly implementation in numericinput.hbs follows the same pattern used in textinput.hbs and textarea.hbs, where:
- The readOnly prop is consistently implemented across all input components using the pattern:
The implementation properly handles:
- Dynamic readonly state through action handlers
- Fallback to static readonly state
- Form-level updateability check
- Consistent parameters (data, editMode, isLoading) across all components
The action handlers are integrated into the component props following React patterns, and the interfaces.ts.hbs shows proper typing support through the GenericProxyProps interface.
The implementation is well-structured and maintains consistency across different input components. The performance concerns mentioned in the original review are mitigated by the template's architecture, which allows for proper memoization in the generated code through the actions interface.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for proper memoization in generated action handlers # Look for action handler implementations ast-grep --pattern 'is$_Readonly = useCallback(($_) => { $$$ })' # Check for potential performance issues in templates rg -g '*.hbs' 'is\w+Readonly.*\(.*\)'Length of output: 108
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for readonly-related patterns in handlebars templates rg -g "*.hbs" "readOnly:.*is\w+Readonly" -A 2 # Look for generated action handlers in TypeScript/JavaScript files rg -g "*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}" "is\w+Readonly.*=.*useCallback" -A 2 # Check for action interface definitions rg -g "*.{ts,tsx}" "interface.*Actions.*{" -A 10 -B 2 # Look for readonly-related imports and hooks rg -g "*.{ts,tsx}" "import.*useCallback.*from 'react'" -A 5Length of output: 342
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for readonly-related patterns in handlebars templates rg -g "*.hbs" "readOnly:.*isReadonly" -A 2 # Look for generated action handlers in TypeScript/JavaScript files rg -g "*.{ts,tsx,js,jsx}" "isReadonly.*useCallback" -A 2 # Check for action interface definitions rg -g "*.{ts,tsx}" "interface.*Actions" -A 10 # Look for memoization patterns in the codebase rg -g "*.{ts,tsx}" "useCallback\(" -A 2 # Check template files for similar readonly patterns fd -e hbs -x grep -l "readOnly:" {} \;Length of output: 1009
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the readOnly implementation in numeric input cat "./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/numericinput.hbs" # Check similar implementations in other input components for consistency cat "./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textinput.hbs" cat "./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textarea.hbs" # Look for action type definitions cat "./judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/custom/interfaces.ts.hbs"Length of output: 13817
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/binarytypeinput.hbs (2)
34-34: LGTM! Verify action method implementation.The dynamic readonly check implementation looks good and follows a consistent pattern. The fallback logic preserves backward compatibility while enabling more flexible control through action methods.
Let's verify the consistency of readonly action method implementations:
✅ Verification successful
Since we're analyzing a Handlebars template that generates React components, let's modify our approach to verify the implementation pattern. We should:
- Look for similar patterns in other template files
- Check the generated code structure (if available)
- Verify the action interface definitions
Based on the output, I can now generate a final response since we have sufficient context from the template files and implementation. The output shows both the template (
binarytypeinput.hbs) and the actual React component implementation (BinaryInput).Implementation pattern is consistent and well-structured
The readonly implementation in the template follows the established pattern and is correctly integrated with the BinaryInput component. The component:
- Properly handles the readonly prop through the actions interface
- Correctly disables file operations (upload, delete) when readonly is true
- Maintains backward compatibility with static readonly checks
- Integrates well with the form's updateable state
The implementation is verified to be correct and safe because:
- The readonly prop properly controls all file manipulation buttons (upload, delete, download)
- The component respects both dynamic (actions-based) and static readonly states
- The implementation follows the same pattern used across other input components
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistency in readonly action method implementations # across generated components # Look for readonly action method patterns rg -A 2 "is\w+Readonly.*?\(.*?\)" --type ts # Check for potential missing implementations rg -A 2 "readonly=\{.*?is\w+Readonly" --type tsxLength of output: 98
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for similar readonly patterns in other template files rg -A 2 "is\w+Readonly.*?\(.*?\)" --type hbs # Look for action interface definitions fd -e ts -e d.ts --exec rg -A 3 "interface.*?Actions" {} # Check other binary input related templates fd "binary.*\.hbs|file.*\.hbs" --exec cat {}Length of output: 17053
Line range hint
36-53: Verify upload/delete handling during readonly state changes.The component handles file operations with callbacks that modify data and trigger blur actions. Consider verifying that ongoing upload operations are handled gracefully if the readonly state changes mid-operation (e.g., due to permissions or form state changes).
Let's check for existing handling of this scenario:
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/enumerationcombo.hbs (1)
42-42: LGTM! Verify consistent readonly pattern usage across templates.The implementation correctly introduces dynamic readonly behavior while maintaining backward compatibility with the existing isReadOnly and isFormUpdateable checks.
Let's verify this pattern is consistently applied across other similar templates:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different search pattern to verify the readonly implementation across templates.
The previous search might have been too specific. These new patterns should help us identify similar readonly implementations across template files, allowing us to verify consistency in the pattern usage.
The readonly pattern is consistently implemented across all input templates
The search results confirm that the same readonly pattern is consistently implemented across all input-related templates in the codebase:
- textinput.hbs
- enumerationcombo.hbs
- textarea.hbs
- numericinput.hbs
- trinarylogiccombo.hbs
- timeinput.hbs
- dateinput.hbs
- binarytypeinput.hbs
- datetimeinput.hbs
All templates follow the exact same pattern:
This consistent implementation ensures uniform behavior for readonly states across all input components.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent readonly implementation pattern across template files # Expected: All similar components should follow the same pattern for readonly logic # Search for InputProps and readonly patterns in template files rg -t hbs 'InputProps.*readOnly:.*is.*Readonly.*\?' 'judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers'Length of output: 107
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for readonly patterns in template files with broader context rg -t hbs 'readOnly:.*actions.*is.*Readonly' -A 2 'judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers' # Also search for similar patterns without InputProps rg -t hbs 'is.*Readonly.*\(data, editMode, isLoading\)' -A 2 'judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers'Length of output: 9064
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/datetimeinput.hbs (2)
Line range hint
59-67: Verify the blur action implementation across components.The onChange handler correctly implements state updates and optional blur actions. The eager copy creation with the new value is properly handled.
Let's verify the consistent implementation of blur actions:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify consistent blur action implementation # Expected: Similar patterns in other component files # Search for blur action patterns with eager copy echo "Checking blur action patterns:" ast-grep --pattern 'const eagerCopy = { ...data, [$_]: $_ };'
57-58: LGTM! Well-structured dynamic state handling implementation.The implementation elegantly handles both readOnly and disabled states through action methods while maintaining proper fallback behavior. This aligns well with the PR objective of implementing "readonly by" functionality.
Let's verify the consistent usage of this pattern across other components:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different search strategy to verify the pattern usage across components.
The previous search might have been too strict. This new approach:
- Uses more flexible pattern matching
- First lists files containing these patterns
- Then shows sample implementations with context
- Handles potential syntax variations in the implementation
This should help us verify if the pattern is consistently used across components and if there are any variations we should be aware of.
Let me try one more search with a different pattern to specifically look for handlebars templates like the one under review.
This new search:
- Specifically targets .hbs files like the one under review
- Uses a pattern that matches the handlebars syntax
- Lists all .hbs files to ensure we're not missing any relevant templates
- Includes more context lines to better understand the implementation
This should help us verify if the pattern in the datetimeinput.hbs is consistently used across similar template files.
Based on the search results, I can see that the pattern is consistently used across different widget fragments in the codebase. Let me verify one more specific aspect focusing on the datetime-related components to ensure complete consistency.
This will help us verify if the pattern is consistently implemented across all date/time-related components, which are most relevant to the component under review.
Let me try one final search with a simpler pattern to check the datetime components.
This will show us the complete implementation of all date/time-related components to verify the consistency of the readonly/disabled pattern implementation.
Implementation verified across all date/time components
The readOnly and disabled patterns are consistently implemented across all date/time input components (DatePicker, TimePicker, and DateTimePicker). All components follow the same pattern:
- readOnly:
actions?.is{AttributeName}Readonly ? actions.is{AttributeName}Readonly(data, editMode, isLoading) : ({static} || !isFormUpdateable())- disabled:
actions?.is{AttributeName}Disabled ? actions.is{AttributeName}Disabled(data, editMode, isLoading) : ({enabledBy} || isLoading)The implementation in datetimeinput.hbs perfectly aligns with this consistent pattern used across the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify consistent usage of readonly/disabled action methods across components # Expected: Similar patterns in other component files # Search for readonly action method usage echo "Checking readonly action patterns:" rg -A 2 "is\w+Readonly\s*\?\s*actions\.is\w+Readonly\(data,\s*editMode,\s*isLoading\)" # Search for disabled action method usage echo "Checking disabled action patterns:" rg -A 2 "is\w+Disabled\s*\?\s*actions\.is\w+Disabled\(data,\s*editMode,\s*isLoading\)"Length of output: 229
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for readonly/disabled patterns with more flexible matching echo "Checking readonly patterns:" rg -l "isReadonly.*actions" echo -e "\nChecking disabled patterns:" rg -l "isDisabled.*actions" echo -e "\nSample implementations:" # Get a few samples with context rg -C 2 "is\w+(?:Readonly|Disabled).*actions"Length of output: 4596
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search in handlebars templates for readonly/disabled patterns echo "Checking patterns in .hbs files:" fd -e hbs -x rg -C 3 "readOnly=\{actions\?\.is.*Readonly|disabled=\{actions\?\.is.*Disabled" {} echo -e "\nListing all .hbs files for context:" fd -e hbsLength of output: 30128
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check specifically datetime-related components for pattern consistency echo "Checking datetime-related patterns:" fd -e hbs -x cat {} \; -x echo -e "\n---\n" \; | rg -A 3 -B 3 "(?:date|time).*(?:readOnly|disabled).*actions\?"Length of output: 198
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check date and time input components echo "Content of dateinput.hbs:" cat judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/dateinput.hbs echo -e "\nContent of timeinput.hbs:" cat judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/timeinput.hbs echo -e "\nContent of datetimeinput.hbs:" cat judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/datetimeinput.hbsLength of output: 12756
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/dateinput.hbs (1)
55-56: LGTM with suggestions for documentation and verification.The implementation properly introduces dynamic readonly/disabled state evaluation while maintaining backward compatibility. The approach is solid and follows good practices by:
- Using safe navigation with
actions?.- Providing fallback logic
- Maintaining existing behavior
However, a few points to consider:
- The action methods now receive
isLoadingas a parameter, which might affect existing implementations- The interface for these action methods should be documented for consistency
Let's verify the usage of these action methods across the codebase:
Consider adding JSDoc comments or TypeScript interfaces to document the expected signature for these action methods:
interface AttributeActionMethods { /** * Determines if the attribute should be readonly * @param data - The current form data * @param editMode - Current edit mode state * @param isLoading - Loading state of the form * @returns boolean indicating if the field should be readonly */ isAttributeReadonly?: (data: any, editMode: boolean, isLoading: boolean) => boolean; // ... similar for isAttributeDisabled }judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textinput.hbs (1)
27-27: Well-structured dynamic readonly check implementation!The implementation follows a consistent pattern with other properties, properly handling undefined actions and providing all necessary context (data, editMode, isLoading) for readonly state determination.
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/types.ts.hbs (1)
37-37: LGTM! The readonly property follows established patterns.The new
is{{ firstToUpper input.attributeType.name }}Readonlyproperty follows the existing pattern of input modifiers and is properly typed with the correct parameters.Let's verify the consistent implementation of readonly checks across components:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the readonly implementation patterns.
This revised approach should help us:
- Find readonly patterns in template files
- Locate actual implementations in TypeScript/React files
- Identify interface definitions with readonly patterns similar to the one being added
Based on the search results, I can now provide a conclusive response about the readonly implementation:
The readonly property implementation follows consistent patterns across the codebase
The search results show that:
- The
is{AttributeName}Readonlyproperty follows the same pattern used across all input components and fragments- The implementation is consistently used in:
- Form inputs (text, date, time, numeric)
- Binary inputs
- Enumeration components (combo, radio)
- Relation inputs
- Tag components
- The readonly state is properly handled with fallback to static configuration:
actions?.is{Name}Readonly ? actions.is{Name}Readonly(data, editMode, isLoading) : ({static} || !isFormUpdateable())🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify consistent implementation of readonly checks # Expected: All components should follow the same pattern for readonly state handling # Test 1: Check for readonly property usage patterns rg -g '*.{tsx,ts}' 'isReadonly.*\?' --type ts # Test 2: Check for potential inconsistencies in readonly implementations rg -g '*.{tsx,ts}' 'readOnly.*=.*' --type tsLength of output: 94
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for readonly-related patterns in template files and source files # Check Handlebars templates for readonly patterns echo "=== Checking Handlebars templates for readonly patterns ===" rg -g '*.hbs' -i 'readonly|readOnly' -A 2 -B 2 # Check TypeScript/React files for readonly implementations echo "=== Checking TypeScript/React files for readonly implementations ===" rg -g '*.{tsx,ts}' -i '\breadonly\b|\breadOnly\b' -A 2 -B 2 # Check specifically for isReadonly function patterns echo "=== Checking for isReadonly function patterns ===" ast-grep --pattern 'interface $_ { $$$ is$_Readonly?: $_ $$$ }'Length of output: 45084
judo-ui-react-itest/ActionGroupTest/action_group_test__god/src/test/resources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/Form/ViewGalaxyForm.tsx.snapshot (4)
134-136: LGTM: Clean implementation of dynamic readOnly stateThe readOnly logic properly implements dynamic state control through the action method while maintaining backward compatibility.
203-205: LGTM: Consistent implementation of readOnly logicThe constellation field follows the same clean pattern for dynamic readOnly state control.
275-277: LGTM: Pattern successfully adapted for NumericInputThe readOnly logic is properly implemented for the numeric input while maintaining consistency with other fields.
311-313: LGTM: Maintains consistent implementationThe originOfName field correctly implements the dynamic readOnly state pattern.
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/components/link/index.tsx.hbs (1)
102-102: Change to 'readOnly' prop looks goodThe updated logic correctly utilizes the
is{{ firstToUpper link.relationType.name }}Readonlyaction to determine thereadOnlystate dynamically.
judo-ui-react/src/main/resources/actor/src/containers/widget-fragments/textinput.hbs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...sources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/View/ViewGalaxyView.tsx.snapshot
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...sources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/View/ViewGalaxyView.tsx.snapshot
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...sources/snapshots/frontend-react/src/containers/View/Galaxy/View/ViewGalaxyView.tsx.snapshot
Show resolved
Hide resolved
