-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: only validate required input fields #320
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes involve updates to the JavaScript logic in the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant SettingsComponent
participant ValidationLogic
User->>SettingsComponent: Fill form
SettingsComponent->>ValidationLogic: Check isFormValid()
ValidationLogic->>SettingsComponent: Validate required fields
SettingsComponent->>User: Show validation messages for relevant fields
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 (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
views/settings/settingsBase.html (2)
88-90
: Consider performance and accessibility improvements.While the implementation is functionally correct, consider these improvements:
- Avoid unnecessary array creation
- Add ARIA attributes for better accessibility
- const visibleFieldsValid = Array.from(requiredFields) - .filter(element => element.offsetParent !== null) - .every(element => element.checkValidity()); + // Avoid unnecessary array creation + let visibleFieldsValid = true; + for (const element of requiredFields) { + if (element.offsetParent !== null) { + if (!element.checkValidity()) { + visibleFieldsValid = false; + break; + } + } + }Also consider adding this attribute to your form fields for better accessibility:
aria-required="true"
Line range hint
93-99
: Consider enhancing validation message feedback.The current implementation uses native form validation messages. Consider providing more descriptive custom validation messages to improve user experience.
requiredFields.forEach(input => { if (input.offsetParent === null) return; input.checkValidity(); - if (!input.validity.valid) - // Trigger validation message - input.dispatchEvent(new Event('blur')); + if (!input.validity.valid) { + // Provide custom validation message based on validation state + const message = input.validity.valueMissing + ? `${input.name || 'Field'} is required` + : input.validationMessage; + input.setCustomValidity(message); + input.dispatchEvent(new Event('blur')); + } });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
views/settings/settingsBase.html
(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
views/settings/settingsBase.html (1)
86-90
: LGTM! Verify handling of dynamically shown/hidden fields.
The selector changes correctly target only required fields, and the visibility check using offsetParent
is a good approach. The implementation aligns well with the PR objective.
Let's verify the handling of dynamically shown/hidden required fields:
✅ Verification successful
The search results show extensive use of x-show
directives in the codebase, particularly in settings pages, to handle dynamic visibility of UI elements based on form state, tooltips, and configuration options. The original review comment was concerned about verifying the handling of dynamically shown/hidden required fields.
Let me search for the actual form validation logic to verify this:
The search results show the form validation logic in settingsBase.html
that correctly handles visibility of required fields:
- The selector specifically targets required fields:
input[type='password'][required], input[type='text'][required]
- The validation checks visibility using
offsetParent !== null
before validating - Only visible required fields are validated using
checkValidity()
- The validation messages are only triggered for visible invalid fields
This implementation aligns with best practices for handling dynamically shown/hidden required fields by:
- Only validating fields that are currently visible in the DOM
- Using native HTML5 validation API
- Properly handling validation state and messages based on visibility
LGTM! The form validation correctly handles dynamically shown/hidden required fields.
The code ensures that:
- Hidden required fields don't block form submission
- Only visible required fields are validated
- Validation messages are only shown for visible fields
- The validation state updates properly when fields are shown/hidden
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any dynamic show/hide logic that might affect required fields
rg -g '*.{html,js}' -A 3 'x-show|v-show|\bstyle.display'
Length of output: 241087
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for form validation logic and required field handling
rg -g '*.{html,js}' -A 5 'isFormValid|checkValidity|required'
Length of output: 92816
No description provided.