yams #202779 validation error of vocabulary constraint reports misleading error about size constraint [validation pending]

Comments

• 2014/01/16 10:07, written by jcristau

  I disagree. If there are errors while filling out a form you don't want to discover them one at a time, you want to be able to fix all of them.
  
  • 2014/01/16 10:25, written by dlaxalde

    It seems to me that the current implementation does not actually report all errors, but only the last one in the list.
    
    • 2014/01/16 10:35, written by dlaxalde

      More specifically, the current implementation reports errors for all attributes/relations, but for individual relations, only the last unsatisfied constraints is reported. So for individual relations, if we keep the idea of reporting errors one at a time, I think it makes more sense to start with the first one, not the last since automatically added constraint will be appended to the list.
      
      • 2014/01/16 10:42, written by jcristau

        sounds reasonable. so yams would keep reporting all errors, and then cubicweb would pick the one it wants, right?
        
        • 2014/01/16 10:52, written by dlaxalde

          class Person(EntityType):
            age = Int()
            gender = String(vocabulary=(u'M', u'F'))
          

          if you put, e.g., a string for age and 'female' for gender, you'll get two errors (for both age and gender), but only one for gender whereas there are actually two unsatisfied constraints: the vocabulary constraint and the (automatically added) size constraint. I suggest to expose the first one first, currently, yams shows the last one first.
          • 2014/01/16 10:59, written by acampeas

            for constraint in rdef.constraints:
            

            if that's related to this snippet in schema.py ~check method, then we'll need to impose an ordering on the constraints ?
            • 2014/01/16 12:16, written by dlaxalde

              That's another story I think. I'm only considering the case where the order is predictable (e.g. when running tests).
              
• 2014/03/31 08:21, written by jcristau

  Hrm. Why did this get in? We go from one arbitrary behaviour to another arbitrary behaviour with a dubious justification, that doesn't sound like progress.
  • 2014/03/31 09:33, written by dlaxalde

    I would argue that there is at least a partial progress.