Validate contributions #214
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the validation looks good, the message refers to the input field, so it is clear. I think it's ok to leave the other validations and the flaky test for later, since the UI is still evolving. But it would be good to add an issue or a TODO in the code as a reminder to review it later.
mccalluc
commented
Jan 15, 2025
|
@ekraffmiller , filed an issue, and added link in the comment. Is that what you had in mind? Thanks! |
Yes, thanks! |
ekraffmiller
approved these changes
Jan 23, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
req#188The user could also misfill Upper/Lower/Bins on the next tab, but in that case, there is an immediate error message, albeit an ugly one, so I'm inclined not to add more validation code there.
For reviewer:
define_analysis_button.is_disabled()) more deeply?