fix(#15241): removed invalid transforms on Inputs

[BGBRWR]

Currently setting expandedRowKeys or editingRowKeys with anything will convert them to booleans; Which is the wrong type and breaks working with these inputs.

Fixes #15241 #15264

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
primeng	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Apr 18, 2024 9:20am

[BGBRWR]

This breaking bug was introduce in v17.13.0 via #14646 by @LcsGa.

[LcsGa]

That might not be the only mistake actually.
There are so many modified lines, it seems like I also made similar mistakes elsewhere (on trackBy input functions for exemple).

[LcsGa]

I'll take a look at it asap to provide a fix (if nobody did it already).

[Viktor-Ivliev]

That might not be the only mistake actually. There are so many modified lines, it seems like I also made similar mistakes elsewhere (on trackBy input functions for exemple).

I think it so #15241 trackBy really does not work =(

[LcsGa]

That might not be the only mistake actually. There are so many modified lines, it seems like I also made similar mistakes elsewhere (on trackBy input functions for exemple).

I think it so #15241 trackBy really does not work =(

Yep, my bad 😓, I'll remove the transforms asap, where it broke things

[BGBRWR]

I added the remaining fixes to all invalid transform Inputs. It ended up including the same changes in the PR #15248.

[LcsGa]

Great! I'll close mine then

[BGBRWR]

fixes #15241

[aaronsalazar]

👍

[LcsGa]

About the last commit, why not simply make a specific transform function instead of completely removing it, as it could increase the DX?

[PaulSchult]

About the last commit, why not simply make a specific transform function instead of completely removing it, as it could increase the DX?

Do you mean something similar to what I suggested in #15264?

Just curious, how do the input transforms enhance the DX?

[LcsGa]

About the last commit, why not simply make a specific transform function instead of completely removing it, as it could increase the DX?

Do you mean something similar to what I suggested in #15264?

Just curious, how do the input transforms enhance the DX?

Yes, exactly!
Well, if you know exactly what value you want to pass and it's not meant to be dynamic, you can do things like this thanks to them:

<!-- before -->
<p-inputnumber [minFractionDigit]="2">

<p-button [rounded]="true">

<!-- after -->
<p-inputnumber minFractionDigit="2">

<p-button rounded>

As you can see, especially with boolean "flags", it is less code to write and this is one good way for using input transforms.

Before that transform function, a lot of libraries already provided such things using setters and now it is just easier.

[BGBRWR]

I agree but I won't have time to add this improvement. The purpose of this PR is to get this library back to a working state. If this PR is still open a week from now I can try to add custom transforms on InputNumber's minFractionDigit/maxFractionDigit.

[PaulSchult]

I agree but I won't have time to add this improvement. The purpose of this PR is to get this library back to a working state. If this PR is still open a week from now I can try to add custom transforms on InputNumber's minFractionDigit/maxFractionDigit.

Reopened #15264 and opened #15275 as well

[cetincakiroglu]

Hi @BGBRWR,

Thanks a lot for the effort and support!