Great suggestion! I actually found the answer yesterday... although I'm not sure if it's good practice, I just had to add an else condition in my saveEmbeddedForms() method to set the relationship with the main object, instead of forcing the relationship from the beginning.
This is the updated code: http://pastie.org/1066339 / model http://pastie.org/1067543 / ExpenseForm http://pastie.org/1066350 / ExpenseCommentValidatorSchema http://pastie.org/1066353 / ExpenseCommentForm Thanks to this, the embed form is saved only if comment body is types, otherwise, the embed form is unset and ignored for the saveEmbeddedForms parent method. Thanks guys for any other ideas on how to improve this code! On Jul 30, 2:35 am, Tom Ptacnik <to...@tomor.cz> wrote: > I think that easy solution is to overwrite the save method of the > object wich is on the embededform. > > Just test if there are some values and if not, end the method. If yes, > call parent::save() > > On 30 čnc, 01:51, J_Wesker <j_chave...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > After making some changes on my code and debugging using die's and > > var_dump() all day, > > I haven't found the cause of all this. But I have make sure of some > > facts: > > > 1. If Iembeddirectly the commentform, and set the body field as > > required, then both objects get saved smoothly, > > unfortunately the bussiness rules I'm following here don't apply. > > > 2. On my extended saveEmbeddedForms() method, $comment is actually > > NULL, > > because on the custom post validator, if no body comment is entered, > > the comment value > > is unset. Therefore, the condition we discussed before complies > > correctly when necessary. > > > 3. Even though the values from the embeddedformaren't set, the > > commentformis saved anyway if left blank. > > > I came to the point to think that perhaps the relation between the > > comment and user table might be the cause, > > and then I decided to remove the relation from the comment table, but > > still, theembedformis saved blank. > > If not removing the relationship and with the following updated code, > > I get a Propel Exception only when the comment > > is left blank. > > >http://pastie.org/1066339 / model > > >http://pastie.org/1066347 / ExpenseForm > > >http://pastie.org/1066350 / ExpenseCommentValidatorSchema > > >http://pastie.org/1066353 / ExpenseCommentForm > > >http://pastie.org/1066364 / PropelException generated > > > UPDATE!!! > > > While writing this post I made a breaktrhough with this, but even so, > > I'm still missing something... > > > If instead of defining the relationship between Expense and Comment > > objects in the ExpenseForm like this: > > > $comment->setExpense($this->getObject()); > > > to this: > > > $comment->setExpenseId($this->getObject()->getId()); > > > when editing an existing expense, comments are saved correctly, and > > most important no blank comment is saved! > > > There is a big BUT, however, the expense object doesn't get an ID > > until after saving the embeded objects, so, how > > can I approach this for new expense forms??? > > > Apparently the problem is about how Propel saves embedded objects, > > because as a direct object relation was made > > with $comment->setExpense(), the saving of theembedobject is forced, > > even if theembedformis deleted >S > > > Any ideas on how to solve this? > > > I will try to analyze more the flow used in sfFormObject::save() > > method tomorrow, and perhaps extending some of the method > > calls used by save() I will find the answer. If someone has any > > suggestion or idea please let me know :) > > > Best regards! -- If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to security at symfony-project.com You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony users" group. To post to this group, send email to symfony-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to symfony-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-users?hl=en
