On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Moritz Onken wrote:
>
> Am 06.03.2009 um 13:14 schrieb Carl Franks:
>
>> 2009/3/5 Moritz Onken :
>>>
>>
>> Other than debugging, would there be a legitimate reason to ever want
>> a non-hidden field for the PK?
>>
> No not really. But I usually start writing form co
Am 06.03.2009 um 13:14 schrieb Carl Franks:
2009/3/5 Moritz Onken :
I really really wish that the ID should not be a Hidden field. I
ran into
this problem several times.
Maybe it's time to patch that :)
Other than debugging, would there be a legitimate reason to ever want
a non-hidden fie
2009/3/6 Leanan Sidhe :
> I think the point was not to have the PK be non-hidden, but to just not
> require it be on the form at all.
>
> I'm not familiar with the code, but I imagine removing it entirely from the
> form would either
> a) make things more difficult
> b) make things impossible
B)
I think the point was not to have the PK be non-hidden, but to just not
require it be on the form at all.
I'm not familiar with the code, but I imagine removing it entirely from the
form would either
a) make things more difficult
b) make things impossible
I do recommend though that there be some
2009/3/5 Moritz Onken :
> I really really wish that the ID should not be a Hidden field. I ran into
> this problem several times.
>
> Maybe it's time to patch that :)
Other than debugging, would there be a legitimate reason to ever want
a non-hidden field for the PK?
Carl
___
Am 05.03.2009 um 20:42 schrieb Leanan Sidhe:
Figured out my problem. I didn't have the hidden fields count and id.
For me id actually had to be debits_item_id, instead of just id,
since that was the primary key for my debititems table.
Hi,
I really really wish that the ID should not be a
I think we can help ypu best if you provide a test which fails and
shows what you are doing.
otherwise we cannot help you if cannot provide us with your source code.
moritz
Am 05.03.2009 um 17:59 schrieb Leanan Sidhe:
The only one that seems to be what I want is the
many_to_many_repeatabl
Figured out my problem. I didn't have the hidden fields count and id.
For me id actually had to be debits_item_id, instead of just id, since that
was the primary key for my debititems table.
For some reason I thought that the count and id hidden fields were just
extraneous data, not necessary.
The only one that seems to be what I want is the
many_to_many_repeatable_nested tests.
I notice in there, the call to $form->model->default_values has an extra
parameter, a hash ref of { nested_base => 'foo' }.
I tried adding {nested_base => 'debits'} to mine, and the end result was
that now inst
Am 05.03.2009 um 15:40 schrieb Leanan Sidhe
:
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Ascii King
wrote:
For starters, I don't think it is supposed to be "schema = DB", just
"schema DB"
schema DB
Also, could you show us the may_have line that sets up the 'debits'
relations
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Ascii King wrote:
> For starters, I don't think it is supposed to be "schema = DB", just
> "schema DB"
>
>
>
> schema DB
>
>
>
> Also, could you show us the may_have line that sets up the 'debits'
> relationship?
I meant might_have, not may_have, an
For starters, I don't think it is supposed to be "schema = DB", just
"schema DB"
schema DB
Also, could you show us the may_have line that sets up the 'debits'
relationship?
Leanan Sidhe wrote:
I'm attempting to make use of the $form->model->default_values and
$form->model->
12 matches
Mail list logo
