[
https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2113?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_41901
]
J Alex commented on WW-2113:
----------------------------
Please evaluate and assign a suitable priority. I had left it as "Minor" since
i didn't know if i was asking for something which was already
present/implementable with current framework.
> Conditional check before firing further validations (shortCircuit without
> error)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WW-2113
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2113
> Project: Struts 2
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Interceptors
> Affects Versions: 2.0.9
> Environment: N/A
> Reporter: J Alex
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Future
>
>
> Hi,
> Consider the following scenario :
> Field A needs to be validated only if certain conditions on fields B , C etc.
> are satisfied ; ex : we need to validate "previous address" fields only if
> "time at current address" = 2 ; otherwise, we dont care abt the values
> entered in these fields.
> In Struts 1.x, the way i did this was to define a custom validator
> (prevAddrTest) that would only return true if "time at current address" = 2
> ; false otherwise - without adding any error messages.
> In validation xml ; prefix this validator before the actual validators for
> this field
> ie . <field property="previousAddress.addressLine1"
> depends="prevAddrTest,mask,minlength">
> So, if prevAddrTest returned false, the remaining validators will not fire
> (i.e they are shortCircuited)
> Now, in Struts 2.x, we must have an error message for the shortCircuit to
> happen, and that would cause pageflow to stop at input, while our actual
> intention is to continue to next page, since the dependent fields can be
> ignored.
> As it stands, i've managed to workaround this by tweaking the workflow
> interceptor to look for a particular error message that'll be thrown by such
> "check" validators, and continue to next page - and in the <s:fielderror>
> tag, add a condition to suppress these messages. I think this is not the
> right way to do it.
> Please let me know if i'm missing anything that the framework provides for
> this - if not, i think the following will be a good enhancement.
> Suggested validator name : expressionCheck
> Function : evaluate the expression and if false ; shortcircuit the remaining
> validators on the fields - **without adding any error message** .
> Benefit : Implement dependent validations on fields
> I've also posted this on Nabble as a response to Matt Raibile's conditional
> validator implementation :
> http://www.nabble.com/Conditional-validation-tf3678771.html#a12137461
> Thanks,
> Joseph
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
