I'm making a form which consist in some text and uploading files. The problem is that the the file is not been saved in the db (blob field) because the client didn't want to so I made a UploadFileForm to make it clean and do the logic of uploading and saving into the File Table (which has the path of that file). So i have:
//HistoryForm
class HistoryForm extends BaseHistoryForm
{
public function configure()
{
unset($this['text']);
$this->setWidget('text', new sfWidgetFormTextareaTinyMCE(array(
'width' => 550,
'height' => 350,
'config' => 'theme_advanced_disable: "anchor,image,cleanup,help"',)));
$this->setValidator('text', new sfValidatorString());
$this->embedForm('uploadfile1', new UploadFileForm());
}
}
//UploadFileForm
class UploadFileForm extends sfForm{
public function configure() {
$this->setWidget('file', new sfWidgetFormInputFile());
$this->setValidator('file', new sfValidatorFile(array(
'required' => false,
'path' => sfConfig::get('sf_upload_dir')
)));
$this->setWidget('name', new sfWidgetFormInputText());
$this->setValidator('name', new sfValidatorString(array('required' => true)));
$this->widgetSchema->setNameFormat('uploadfile[%s]');
}
public function save({data_to_be_saved}){
//logic of saving
}
}
The main problem is that embeding a doctrine form works perfectly, but if I want to save a non doctrine form the save method is never called (seems fine because not all sfForms have to be saved) but if I override the saveEmbeddedForms the embed sfForm isn't binded! Reading the symfony's code found out that when embeding a form what really does is appending the fields to the main widgetSchema so using the embed form is practically usless... So, what I do is making a save method in the sfForm which does the saving by getting all needed variables from parameters. This is call is made in the overrided method save of the main doctrine form:
//HistoryForm
class HistoryForm extends BaseHistoryForm
{
...
public function save($con = null) {
$hc = parent::save($con);
foreach ($this->getEmbeddedForms() as $form) {
$values = $this->getValue($form->getName());
$form->save($hc, $values);
}
}
I spent all afternoon thinking and reading symfony's core code and didn't found a proper approach. So... does anyone knows (or thinks) a better approach?
The generally accepted approach to doing what I think you are trying to do is to infact not use an embedded form. Mixing doctrine form and sfForms is troublesome to say the least.
I'm assuming you're trying to associated a database record with a file?
If so, the usually way to do this is to create a filename field on the HistoryForm. make this field a sfWidgetInputFile widget. This widget will save to the file system, then overwrite the forms 'save' method to save the file's name filename field instead of the file contents.
Then add an accessor on the model or an asset helper class to get the record's associated file on the file system
Did you try this plugin? I had problems with embedding relations but after trying this out all of them were solved.
Related
Using CodeIgniter 3, I autoload my database config, now how do I change the database connected dynamically ? I was thinking like using session to pass the database value, but session cannot be used in the database config file.
I know I can manually load database and change it, but then I have to call and load the database in every controller and I have tons of the controller, therefore I would like to avoid setting the database manually.
There is probably more than one way to do what you want. The solution shown here uses CodeIgniter’s "Hooks" feature. Specifically, it uses the "post_controller_constructor" hook to match the name of a controller with a specific database configuration defined in database.php.
After the hook does its work the application can make calls to the database in the typical CI way using $this->db->. For example...
$query = $this->db->get('mytable');
This solution is based on the assumption that only one database connection is need for any given controller. This means that all methods in that controller (or any models loaded by the controller) use the same connection.
Here's how it is done.
In application/config/config.php
$config['enable_hooks'] = TRUE;
In application/config/hooks.php
$hook['post_controller_constructor'][] = array(
'class' => '',
'function' => 'set_db_connection',
'filename' => 'post_controller_hook.php',
'filepath' => 'hooks'
);
The file post_controller_hook.php is where the work gets done. It uses lists of controller names to determine which database config is to be loaded.
The list ($controller_lists) contains sub-arrays which group controller names by the db configuration needed. A search is done through each sub-array to find the matching controller name. When a controller name is found the key of that sub-array is the db config to be loaded. If no match is found the 'default' config is used.
The $controller_lists array is hard-coded here but it could easily be loaded from a config file instead. A config file might make maintaining the lists easier.
file application/config/post_controller_hook.php
function set_db_connection()
{
$CI = get_instance();
$controller = $CI->router->class;
$loadConfig = 'default'; //if nothing found in lists we're still good
$controller_lists = array(
'config2' => ['profile'],
'config3' => ['discusion', 'home'],
'config4' => ['suppliers', 'customers', 'inventory', 'orders']
);
foreach($controller_lists as $config_name => $list)
{
if(in_array($controller, $list))
{
$loadConfig = $config_name;
break;
}
}
$CI->load->database($loadConfig);
}
The ability to not load a database for controllers that don't need one could be added if that was desirable. But I'm not going there.
As stated earlier, this solution uses the assumption that only one database configuration (connection) is used for any given controller. If certain methods of a controller need to use a different db configuration this solution becomes more complicated.
Adding the method to the search is easy. The first few lines of set_db_connection() would look like this.
function set_db_connection()
{
$CI = get_instance();
$controller = $CI->router->class;
$method = $CI->router->method;
if($method !== 'index')
{
$controller .= '/'.$method; //append method name
}
$loadConfig = 'default'; //if nothing found in lists we're still good
So now $controller will hold either 'controller/method', or just 'controller' if index() is to being called.
Consider a controller called Viewstate with three methods
class Viewstate extends CI_Controller
{
public function index(){
//uses db 'config4'
}
public function report(){
//uses db 'Config2'
}
public function process(){
//uses db 'Config3'
}
}
We have to include each 'viewstate/method' in the sub-arrays like this.
$controller_lists = array(
'config2' => ['profile', 'viewstate/report'],
'config3' => ['disscusion', 'home', 'viewstate/process'],
'config4' => ['viewstate', 'customers', 'inventory', 'orders']
);
//the rest of the function is as shown earlier
Any 'viewstate/method' not in the search lists it will be assigned the 'default' db config. So it's easy to sort the various needs of viewstate.
The problem is that every 'controller/method' in the site must now be included in the search lists. If the Profile controller has ten methods every combination must now be in the config2 sub-array. So if there are lots of controllers and controller/methods this solution is a poor choice. There might be an elegant way around this problem but that's probably a topic for a new question.
I'm trying implement file uploading functionality for my app with Symfony 3.
I have a product entiry, that have relation to File entiry.
Part of Product:
/**
* #ORM\OneToMany(targetEntity="AppBundle\Entity\File", mappedBy="product")
* #ORM\OrderBy({"weight" = "DESC"})
*/
protected $files;
and field on form:
->add('files', FileType::class, array('multiple'=> true, 'data_class'=> 'AppBundle\Entity\File'));
public function configureOptions(OptionsResolver $resolver)
{
$resolver->setDefaults(array(
'data_class' => 'AppBundle\Entity\Product',
));
}
As you can see, I'm set data_class.
and in controller I'm trying handle form
public function addAction(Request $request)
{
$em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager();
$product = new Product();
$product->setAddedBy($this->getUser());
$form = $this->createForm(ProductType::class, null);
$form->handleRequest($request);
...
and I have an error:
Expected argument of type "AppBundle\Entity\File", "Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\File\UploadedFile" given
If I drop data_class mapping I have no error and no object, just array.
How I can resolve this error, how to transform UploadedFile to File (Entiry). I'm trying to create Transformer, but I just got the ProductEntiry class, and as result can't process it, becouse it's without files.
Before I'll get to the point, just one suggest. In line:
$form = $this->createForm(ProductType::class, null);
I would provide $product variable so it will be automatically filled with data instead of creating new one. So it should be changed to :
$form = $this->createForm(ProductType::class, $product);
Ok, now, the problem occurs, because you probably have in your Product class a setter like:
public function addFile(AppBundle\Entity\File $file) { ... }
Then, after successful validation, the form tries to fill instance of Product class with data from the form, which contains Symfony's UploadedFile class instance. I hope you understand that.
Now, you have (at least) two possible solutions.
You can set "mapped" => false option for the file field. That will stop form from trying to put it's value into underlying object (Product instance).
After doing that you can handle the value on your own, which is handle file upload, create AppBundle/Entity/File instance and put it into $product variable via setter.
That the lazy solution, but if you would like to do the same in other forms, you will have to copy the code to every controller that needs it. So it's easier only for one time usage.
The right solution would be to convert UploadedFile to you File object with a Data Transformer. It's a longer topic to talk about and exact solution depends on your data flow that you want to achieve. Therefore if you want to do this right, read about Data Transformers in Symfony's docs first.
I promise that you will thank yourself later if you do that the right way. I've spent some time on understanding Symfony Form Component including Data Transformers and solved a similar issue that way. Now it pays back. I have reusable image upload form that handles even removing previously uploaded files in edit forms.
P.S.
It's "entity", not "entiry". You've wrote "entiry" twice, so I'm just saying FYI.
I create my forms via extending Zend_Form. And I use one Form for addAction() and editAction(). When I want to remove Elements within the editing process I can do so easily via $form->removeElement('x').
But what would be the best approach on removing a field from the validator?
1) Removing and Adding the newly set validator
//Controllers editAction()
$form->removeValidator('Db_NoRecordExists');
$form->addValidator('Db_NoRecordExists', true, array(
'table'=>'table',
'field'=>'field',
'exclude'=>array(
'field'=>'id',
'value'=>$this->_getParam('id')
)
));
2) Injecting editing ID into the Form
//Forms Contstructor
public function __construct($idToEdit=0, $options=null)
{
$this->setIdToEdit($idToEdit);
parent::__construct($options);
}
//within init()
$formField->addValidator('Db_NoRecordExists', true, array(
'table'=>'table',
'field'=>'field',
'exclude'=>array(
'field'=>'id',
'value'=>$this->getIdToEdit()
)
));
//Controller calling the form like this:
$form = new Custom_Form($this->_getParam('id'), $options);
3) Something else?
Maybe there is even something else I am missing, to me though somehow both ideas don't look too well to me.
For a cleaner use of SO here the answer as a post
//SOLUTION Okay, so while browsing to Zends Sourcecode (should have done that before asking...) i found the best solution (i guess). The Abstract DB Validation classes got a
function setExclude() so we can then use it in a nice flow:
//Inside Controller before valling $form->isValid()
$form->getElement('x')->getValidator('Db_NoRecordExists')->setExclude(array(
'field'=>'some_id',
'value'=>$idToEdit
))
I am using Symfony with propel to generate a form called BaseMeetingMeetingsForm.
In MeetingMeetingsForm.class.php I have the following configure method:
public function configure() {
$this->useFields(array('name', 'group_id', 'location', 'start', 'length'));
$this->widgetSchema['invited'] = new myWidgetFormTokenAutocompleter(array("url"=>"/user/json"));
}
In MeetingMeetings.php my save method is simply:
public function save(PropelPDO $con = null) {
$this->setOwnerId(Meeting::getUserId());
return parent::save($con);
}
However propel doesn't know about my custom field and as such doesn't do anything with it. Where and how to I put in a special section that can deal with this form field, please be aware it is not just a simple save to database, I need to deal with the input specially before it is input.
Thanks for your time and advice,
You have to define a validator (and/or create your own). The validator clean() method returns the value that needs to be persisted.
In Doctrine (I don't know Propel) the form then calls the doUpdateObject() on the form, which in turns calls the fromArray($arr) function on the model.
So if it's already a property on your model you'll only need to create the validator. If it's a more complex widget, you'll need to add some logic to the form.
Hey guys, I've used the Symfony admin generator for a module.
Everything is working, but when the form for my model is instantiated, I need to pass in my own option.
I could do this myself by overriding the executeNew, executeCreate functions in myModuleActions.class.php (which extends myModuleAutoActions).
But I was hoping for a neater solution?
Perhaps overriding one of the configuration classes is the way to go. I basically need to add the current sf_user object ($this->getUser) as an "sf_user" option for the form, to avoid using sfContext in the myModuleForm.
Any ideas?
Welcome to Stack Overflow, jolly18.
I would just use sfContext. For example, in my app, I have a subform that creates a new Note object and assigns the user to it. In my form's configure() I have:
$new_note->setAuthor(sfContext::getInstance()->getUser()->getUsername());
I see the book calls this "The fastest but ugly way" because it makes "a big coupling between the form and the context, making the testing and reusability more difficult." But in practice... this works well and I can move on.
if module was generated using admin-generator :
in apps/backend/modules/books/actions/actions.class.php
modify: in
executeEdit(){
//leave rest unchanged
$values=array('activity_id'=>$activity_id, 'book_id'=>$book_id, 'todo_id'=>$todo_id, 'user_id'=>$this->getUser()->getGuardUser()->getId());
$this->form = new TabelBooksForm($TabelBooks, $values);
}
modify: in
executeNew(){
//leave rest unchanged
$values=array('activity_id'=>$activity_id, 'book_id'=>$book_id, 'todo_id'=>$todo_id, 'user_id'=>$this->getUser()->getGuardUser()->getId());
$this->form = new TabelBooksForm(array(), $values);
}
in TabelBooksForm.class.php
public function configure()
{
if ($this->isNew()) {
$this->setWidget('book_id', new sfWidgetFormInputHidden());
$this->setDefault('book_id', $this->getOption('book_id'));
$this->setWidget('activity_id', new sfWidgetFormInputHidden());
$this->setDefault('activity_id', $this->getOption('activity_id'));
$this->setWidget('todo_id', new sfWidgetFormInputHidden());
$this->setDefault('todo_id', $this->getOption('todo_id'));
}
}
i've been facing this problem for a while but symfony always surprises me with some neat code that i was not aware of.
I assume you'r using sfPropelPlugin, quite standar, if you checkout the code generated in cache (note: this code will be available once you tried to open the module from the browser, so firts try to look at it so we dont get in trouble :P) you may see something like:
cache/{application_name}(generally frontend or backend)/dev(enviromnemt)/autoModule_name( look here for the module)/:
lib
action
The action folder contains an action.class.php file that defines all actions generated by the generator (executeNew, Edit, Create, Update, etc). If you look a the implementation of executeNew and executeEdit, you can see that they ask a configuration instace the actual form to display, here is an example:
public function executeNew(sfWebRequest $request)
{
$this->form = $this->configuration->getForm();
$this->PaymentOrder = $this->form->getObject();
}
The configuration var containt an instance of a configuration class defined in the lib folder i mentioned earlier. That class tweaks the form to fit the object needs (generally by setting a fresh object instance).
So here comes the magic, the classes you see in your module extend from those in cache, so by pure logic, if you modifi the getForm() method in the main module/lib folder to fit your needs, you wont have to hack forms by getting user valuer where you shouldn't.
Hope this helps!