Support for [email protected]

[radekmie]

Release note.

[serkandurusoy]

This is a breaking change, though! What are your thoughts on backwards compatibility?

[radekmie]

I want to support both at once - simply create another birdge like SimpleSchema2Bridge.

[radekmie]

Well, there's a problem: SimpleSchema.oneOf.

[macrozone]

would love to use simpleSchema 2. Then, we could finally use schema-based-forms in non-meteor-environements like storybook <3<3<3

I also spotted some breaking changes for my usage, but it should be fairly straight-forward.

[radekmie]

OK, I've started to implement this and there's one big issue with the new version internals - due to oneOf, every field is treated as an array. To make it possible in any way, then we could either always get the first one or configure it somehow.

[radekmie]

Well, I think I've got a solution.

import SimpleSchema from 'simpl-schema';

const schema = new SimpleSchema({
    // Only one type = no problem
    fieldA: String, // String

    // Only one type = no problem
    fieldB: { // String
        type: String
    },

    // Few types = first type
    fieldC: { // String
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf(String, Number)
    },

    // Few types, one with type = selected one
    fieldD: { // Number
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf(String, {
            type: Number,
            uniformsType: true
        })
    },

    // Few types, few with type = first selected one
    fieldE: { // String
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf({
            type: String, 
            uniformsType: true
        }, {
            type: Number,
            uniformsType: true
        })
    }
});

Problem: two types in schema - how to render one form with type 1 and another form with type 2?

What do you think?

[macrozone]

I think i would not hook into the oneOf-function.

If you get this schema, you can't guess which field to render. So the developer would need to specify the field either by using an explicit field in the or by specifying a component in the schema:

import SimpleSchema from 'simpl-schema';

const schema = new SimpleSchema({

    fieldC: { 
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf(String, Number),
        uniforms: {
           component: TextField, 
        }
    },
});

If nothing is specified, i would just use the first type. I think that this is an edge-case anyway.

[radekmie]

But I can't guess type from the field. Consider this example:

import SimpleSchema from 'simpl-schema';

const schema = new SimpleSchema({
    fieldA: { 
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf(String, [String]),
        uniforms: {
           component: CustomField
        }
    },
    fieldB: { 
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf(
            {type: String, min: 10},
            {type: String, max: 10}
        ),
        uniforms: {
           component: TextField
        }
    }
});

Which one should we render now?

[macrozone]

In the first case, you render CustomField (fieldA) and in the second case a TextField with property min: 10. (fieldB, this definition makes little sense anyway).

Or maybe i don't understand the problem?

Edit: SimpleSchema.oneOf just say that any of this definitions are valid types. So the rendered field has just to fullfill this validation. If e.g. String or Number are both fine, then both a TextField and a NumberField can fullfill this validation.

I hardly see a usecase for this. Maybe if you want to switch conditionally between two valid definitions and render the best form-element for that definition. But that would need to be specified in the form.

[radekmie]

Yeah, of course fieldA will render CustomField, but every field receive it's type (and other props).

Maybe this will clarify:

{
    userId: {
        type: SimpleSchema.oneOf({
            type: String,
            regEx: /^.{16}$/
        }, {
            type: String,
            allowedValues: [
                'admin',
                'tester',
                'guest'
            ]
        })
    }
}

No matter, which field I'll render - which props should I provide?

Edit: Of course, those are quite esoteric schemas, but possible ones.

[radekmie]

Done! I've implemented it in 1.1.0 - go and check it out. Right now, there's no support for SimpleSchema.oneOf(...) with multiple types - only first one is used.

---

EDIT: It will work in 1.1.1 - I forgot to export it in 1.1.0, sorry.

[logankoester]

Awesome, thank you! 😍

[macrozone]

Love you guy <3

Logan Koester [email protected] schrieb am Mi., 28. Sep. 2016,
08:44:

Awesome, thank you! 😍

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#99 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB4YgWVqDqqN4jRU3W4Syzg53R4Cxi96ks5qugzegaJpZM4JyEQE
.