Re: Thoughts on QuickForm-additions (again)

On 15 Aug 2003 at 10:08, Markus Wolff wrote: > Stefan Neufeind wrote: > > > But I'd like to try again and politely ask for your comments on this > > proposal to QuickForm > [...] > > Been talking to Bertrand Mansion (one lead of HTML_QuickForm) I > > proposed a) addition of a new regex for validating numericals with > > up to two decimals. b) functions to validate a minValue and a > > maxValue for numerical input fields. > [...] > > So the question is whether people will implement such functionality > > on their own every time they might need it or if these are such > > elementary features that they should be added. > > Hi Stefan, > > I think both features would make very good additions to the standard > QuickForm feature-set as they´re quite common. > > Question is, who has time to do it? ;-) Well I don't think this is a real problem :-) I already had to write workarounds myself to add these features "from outside" to QuickForm. After talking to Bernard (one lead of QuickForm) I couldn't imagine why he was so strongly against changing / improving "anything". Okay, maybe the regex-part for numerical numbers is maybe one point of discussion - although I believe it's a common need. But minValue and maxValue are essential in my eyes. There would also be another solution for the regex numericalDecimal (or what it mightbe called). Having a common: /^(([0-9]+)|([0-9]+\.[0-9]{1,n}))$/) with not 2 but n decimals would be an open solution. And we already have an optional value in the concept of QuickForm - that might be used for "n". This way you can even activate 3 decimals or whatever you might need. What do the others think about these additions? If most people agree I'd again offer to Bernard to add these features. Stefan