Feature/finished/iia 2029 edit pattern field throws exceptions #468
Conversation
dholubek
requested review from
bhharsh13,
carldea,
dukke,
jdsmithsos and
swaroopsalvi
| ConceptRecord conceptRecord = (ConceptRecord) (Object) value; | ||
| entityProperty.set(Entity.getFast(conceptRecord.nid()).toProxy()); | ||
| } | ||
| entityProperty.set(value); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks odd to me.
Should the if condition return? It's setting entityProperty.set() twice.
We should ask for a second opinion from the data team.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there are times when it is one data type and times when it is another... ie ConceptRecord and EntityFacade.
dukke
left a comment
dukke
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice work fixing this however I find having database classes inside the custom controls not ideal. I think as a design goal it's better to keep the custom controls as much decoupled from the rest of Komet as possible, especially database objects.
| entityProperty.set(Entity.getFast(conceptRecord.nid()).toProxy()); | ||
| } | ||
| entityProperty.set(value); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wouldn't put this code here. Can we possibly get it into somewhere else?
IMO the control should be as much as possible decoupled from the rest of Komet.
So, as much as possible not have it use any of Komets classes, especially database objects.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the controls already have EntityFacade typed in them.
3 participants
https://ikmdev.atlassian.net/browse/IIA-2029
Fixes defects around patterns and the UI concept component control. Basically there were different datatypes besides EntityProxy or EntityFacade that can get into that control and/or get muddled at save/update time. This addresses that.