error editing details for a jitar set with multiple users #2272
Comments
drgrice1
added a commit
to drgrice1/webwork2
that referenced
this issue
Dec 6, 2023
Make sure that the `$userRecord` that is passed to the `fieldHTML` method in `ProblemSetDetail.pm` exists before trying to access it. Note the actual error occurs for the `counts_parent_grade` column of the problem record which is the only problem record field that is of the "choose" type (which is why this does not occur for non JITAR sets). The earlier checks that the $userRecord exists are needed as the hacked method of accessing the data directly via the hash key rather than using the accessor turns the undefined value into a hash reference if that is done. Then the check if the $userRecord exists in the "choose" case later will fail because it will exist. I don't know how long this bug has existed, but I know it goes back to at least WeBWorK 2.17 (I suspect it goes back considerably further though). The fieldHTML method in general needs a rewrite. There is to much hackery in use there. The comment on lines 855-857 is about part of what is causing this problem. That comment dates back to 2007, and the problem it refers to goes back further.
drgrice1
added a commit
to drgrice1/webwork2
that referenced
this issue
Dec 17, 2023
Make sure that the `$userRecord` that is passed to the `fieldHTML` method in `ProblemSetDetail.pm` exists before trying to access it. Note the actual error occurs for the `counts_parent_grade` column of the problem record which is the only problem record field that is of the "choose" type (which is why this does not occur for non JITAR sets). The earlier checks that the $userRecord exists are needed as the hacked method of accessing the data directly via the hash key rather than using the accessor turns the undefined value into a hash reference if that is done. Then the check if the $userRecord exists in the "choose" case later will fail because it will exist. I don't know how long this bug has existed, but I know it goes back to at least WeBWorK 2.17 (I suspect it goes back considerably further though). The fieldHTML method in general needs a rewrite. There is to much hackery in use there. The comment on lines 855-857 is about part of what is causing this problem. That comment dates back to 2007, and the problem it refers to goes back further.
drgrice1
added a commit
to drgrice1/webwork2
that referenced
this issue
Jan 6, 2024
Make sure that the `$userRecord` that is passed to the `fieldHTML` method in `ProblemSetDetail.pm` exists before trying to access it. Note the actual error occurs for the `counts_parent_grade` column of the problem record which is the only problem record field that is of the "choose" type (which is why this does not occur for non JITAR sets). The earlier checks that the $userRecord exists are needed as the hacked method of accessing the data directly via the hash key rather than using the accessor turns the undefined value into a hash reference if that is done. Then the check if the $userRecord exists in the "choose" case later will fail because it will exist. I don't know how long this bug has existed, but I know it goes back to at least WeBWorK 2.17 (I suspect it goes back considerably further though). The fieldHTML method in general needs a rewrite. There is to much hackery in use there. The comment on lines 855-857 is about part of what is causing this problem. That comment dates back to 2007, and the problem it refers to goes back further.
|
Fixed in #2273 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
If there is a JITAR set assigned to two users...
And you go to Instructor Tools, select that set and those two users...
And click "Edit one set's details for some or all users"...
then there is an error message:
Can't call method "counts_parent_grade" on unblessed reference at /opt/webwork/webwork2/lib/WeBWorK/ContentGenerator/Instructor/ProblemSetDetail.pm line 984.I haven't explored what causes this. But I'm filing the issue, discovered while testing things with #2271.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: