enhance: field options sidebar #1505
Conversation
…or_form_builder_ui_redesign
commit daae343 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Fri Oct 25 10:21:05 2024 +0600 fix logo, minor css commit 7590512 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Thu Oct 17 13:00:12 2024 +0600 pro icon and link commit b720564 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Wed Oct 16 17:31:46 2024 +0600 action buttons commit 743860f Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Wed Oct 16 13:10:14 2024 +0600 various fields time, phone field, pro fields, image, file, recaptcha, hidden fields commit e58e788 Merge: 2b12da4 f92a621 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Tue Oct 15 17:25:44 2024 +0600 Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/develop' into enhance/form_builder_content_body_ui_redesign commit 2b12da4 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Tue Oct 15 17:24:24 2024 +0600 column field, section break commit 63f6663 Author: Sapayth Hossain <[email protected]> Date: Mon Oct 14 21:47:26 2024 +0600 regular fields
…der_stage_form_builder_ui_redesign
…der_stage_form_builder_ui_redesign
…der_stage_form_builder_ui_redesign
…der_stage_form_builder_ui_redesign
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a comprehensive update to the WP User Frontend (WPUF) plugin, focusing on enhancing the form builder interface, styling, and functionality. The changes span multiple files across JavaScript, PHP, and CSS, introducing new components, updating existing ones, and refining the user experience. Key modifications include updating form templates, improving form field interactions, and modernizing the admin and frontend interfaces. Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Poem
Tip CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 24
🔭 Outside diff range comments (3)
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder.js (1)
Line range hint
93-108: Optimize Field Lookup in open_field_settingsUse an early return if the field is not found (field.length is 0) to skip extra checks. This helps avoid referencing field[0] when the array is empty.
if (!field.length) { + return; } if ('field-options' === state.current_panel && field[0].id === ...admin/form-builder/assets/js/form-builder.js (1)
Line range hint
93-108: Defensive Programming: Check Existence of Field[0]When retrieving field[0], consider verifying field.length first, to avoid referencing an index out of bounds.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/help-text/index.js (1)
Line range hint
8-15: Refactor tooltip configuration to use placement propThe placement prop is defined with validation but not used in the tooltip initialization. Consider these improvements:
props: { text: { type: String, default: '' }, placement: { type: String, default: 'top', - validator: function (placement) { - return ['top', 'right', 'bottom', 'left'].indexOf(placement) >= 0; - } + validator: function (placement) { + return ['auto top', 'auto right', 'auto bottom', 'auto left'].indexOf(placement) >= 0; + } } }, mounted: function () { $( this.$el ).tooltip({ title: this.text, - placement: 'auto top' + placement: this.placement }); }Also consider adding a watcher for prop changes:
watch: { text(newVal) { $(this.$el).tooltip('dispose').tooltip({ title: newVal, placement: this.placement }); }, placement(newVal) { $(this.$el).tooltip('dispose').tooltip({ title: this.text, placement: newVal }); } }Also applies to: 20-23
🧹 Nitpick comments (53)
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-image_upload/template.php (1)
8-10: Enhance accessibility for the upload button.The SVG icon and layout look good, but we should improve accessibility.
Add these accessibility attributes:
-<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5"> +<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5" + role="img" aria-hidden="true">admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-textarea_field/template.php (1)
11-14: Consider improving the rich text editor conditional logicThe current implementation has a few potential improvements:
- The condition
'no' !== field.richcould be more explicit- The prop naming is inconsistent (
default_textvsdefault)Consider this refactoring:
- <text-editor - v-if="'no' !== field.rich" - :default_text="field.default" - :rich="field.rich"></text-editor> + <text-editor + v-if="field.rich === 'yes'" + :default="field.default" + :rich="field.rich"></text-editor>admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/template.php (3)
2-5: Enhance accessibility by ensuring clear labeling
You're using a label (line 3) together with Vue data bindings (line 4). Consider adding a “for” attribute or an ARIA attribute that references the applicable control for better accessibility. In addition, double-check that screen readers can properly associate this label with any related checkbox or text field.
72-78: Consider client-side validations for numeric or enumerated values
“Value” fields in lines 74-77 allow any text input. If you need strictly numeric or enumerated data, add client-side checks or validations.
80-110: Streamline icon usage
You’re using inline SVG icons, which is fine. If they’re used frequently, consider centralizing them in a reusable SVG component or referencing a sprite for consistency and lower DOM overhead.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/index.js (4)
86-88: Consider removing the “self = this” alias
On line 115 (within the delete_field method), the code assigns “var self = this;” but uses an arrow callback. Arrow functions already capture “this” from the parent scope. Removing this alias can make the code more concise.Here’s a quick snippet:
-delete_field: function(index) { - var self = this; - (Swal.fire({...})).then((result) => { - if (result.isConfirmed) { - self.$store.commit('delete_form_field_element', index); - } - }); +delete_field: function(index) { + Swal.fire({...}).then((result) => { + if (result.isConfirmed) { + this.$store.commit('delete_form_field_element', index); + } + }); },
146-146: Simplify the boolean expression & use optional chaining
Line 146: “return (this.field_settings[template] && this.field_settings[template].pro_feature) ? true : false;”Use optional chaining and a logical NOT operator or double NOT to remove unnecessary ternary booleans.
-is_pro_feature: function (template) { - return (this.field_settings[template] && this.field_settings[template].pro_feature) ? true : false; +is_pro_feature: function (template) { + return !!this.field_settings?.[template]?.pro_feature; }🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 146-146: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 146-146: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
169-169: Use optional chaining
Line 169: A similar optional chaining enhancement would reduce complexity.-is_full_width: function (template) { - if (this.field_settings[template] && this.field_settings[template].is_full_width) { - return true; - } - return false; +is_full_width: function (template) { + return !!this.field_settings?.[template]?.is_full_width; }🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 169-169: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
177-177: Remove redundant ternary
Line 177: “return (field.recaptcha_type && 'invisible_recaptcha' === field.recaptcha_type) ? true : false;”Consider simplifying to a direct comparison for clarity.
-is_invisible: function (field) { - return ( field.recaptcha_type && 'invisible_recaptcha' === field.recaptcha_type ) ? true : false; +is_invisible: function (field) { + return field.recaptcha_type === 'invisible_recaptcha'; }🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 177-177: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-column_field/template.php (1)
57-105: UI clarity
The control buttons and icons are well grouped. The usage of “group-hover” transitions is a nice modern pattern. Keep an eye on color contrast for accessibility.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/template.php (2)
55-114: Button states
On lines 58–77, you handle disabled vs. enabled states with separate templates. This is functional, but consider toggling classes on the same elements instead of duplicating them in separate blocks. This can reduce code duplication.
121-192: Hidden fields management
It’s excellent that hidden fields get their own section. This helps keep the UI less cluttered. Confirm that the user is clearly informed about which fields are hidden from the site visitors once the form is generated.admin/form-builder/views/form-builder-v4.1.php (2)
13-18: Improve Accessibility with Placeholder or aria-labelConsider adding accessibility attributes (e.g., placeholder, aria-label) for the title input when not editing to make it more screen-reader friendly.
169-173: Enhance UX with Quick Field Option AccessThe “Field Options” tab is placed alongside “Add Fields.” For complex forms, consider giving a quick highlight or direct link in the “Add Fields” panel to jump to “Field Options” for faster configuration.
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder.js (2)
45-46: Avoid Redundant Condition in is_post_formThis line duplicates the condition for “is_older_form && post.post_type === 'wpuf_forms'.” Consider simplifying this logic for readability.
602-603: Consider Avoiding Magic Panel StringsWhen saving, the panel is forced to either 'form-fields' or 'form-fields-v4-1.' Consider an enum or constant reference in Vuex to avoid string-based references scattered throughout the code.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/form-builder.js (1)
423-428: Prevent Data Loss on Page Unload“isDirty” is set to true on form changes, prompting a confirm exit. That’s good. Consider implementing a manual “Save or Discard” prompt for additional user clarity.
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-components.js (4)
303-303: Avoid Unnecessary Alias for selfStatic analysis indicates that aliasing “this” to “self” in an arrow function is unnecessary. Removing the extra variable can simplify the code.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 303-303: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
334-334: Remove Ternary with Boolean LiteralsStatic analysis flags lines with boolean literal usage in a ternary. Instead of “return x ? true : false;” just “return !!x.” This is more succinct and clarifies intent.
- return something ? true : false; + return !!something;Also applies to: 365-365
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 334-334: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 334-334: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
1612-1612: Optional Chaining RecommendationWhere feasible, consider optional chaining to read nested properties safely. For instance, “validator?.msg” can help avoid crashes if “validator” is undefined.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 1612-1612: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
1635-1635: Eliminate Redundant Aliasing of this with selfStatic analysis warns about reassigning this context to “self.” Using arrow functions provides lexical scoping for “this,” so “self” is typically unneeded.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 1635-1635: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
assets/js-templates/form-components.php (5)
85-94: Use consistent wrapping & nesting for improved maintainability.
The new template starts with a different structure than the existing one, but both seem to serve similar purposes (rendering the form stage). Consider aligning the wrapper classes and structure to avoid confusion when maintaining multiple versions of the same template.
140-185: Localize text labels for better i18n coverage.
Strings like “Copy,” “Edit,” and “Remove” are embedded within control buttons. For multilingual support, consider wrapping these strings in translation functions or placeholders so that they can be localized.
202-205: Clarify hidden submit block usage.
It looks like you insert a hidden list item for submit behavior. Add a short comment or rename the class to clarify the rationale (e.g., “Submit block is hidden on the builder stage but shown during actual rendering”).
302-316: Keep multi-select styles consistent.
The new classes (e.g., “wpuf-border-primary”) should remain consistent across all select-based fields. Confirm that similarly styled components (radio, dropdown) also use matching Tailwind or utility classes for visual coherence.
Line range hint
448-484: Segment advanced settings for uniform code structure.
Basic and advanced settings are toggled with similar logic. These blocks can be further standardized (like using a shared “toggle-section” mixin or partial). That would enhance code reusability and reduce accidental divergence.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_title/template.php (1)
7-8: Consider consolidating class handling approach.The component uses both dynamic (
:class="class_names('textfield')") and static Tailwind classes. This could lead to:
- Potential style conflicts
- Maintenance challenges
- Specificity issues (note the
!important flag)Consider moving all styling to the dynamic class binding for better maintainability.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-multiselect/template.php (1)
12-15: Consider using v-bind shorthand for multiple attributesThe option elements could be more concisely written using v-bind object syntax.
- <option - class="checked:wpuf-bg-primary" - v-for="(option, key) in option_field.options" - :value="key">{{ option }}</option> + <option + v-for="(option, key) in option_field.options" + v-bind="{ + class: 'checked:wpuf-bg-primary', + value: key + }" + >{{ option }}</option>admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-dropdown_field/template.php (1)
4-4: Consider extracting common class patternsThe select element has multiple utility classes that might be reused across other form elements. Consider extracting these into a shared class or component-level style definition.
- class="wpuf-block wpuf-w-full wpuf-min-w-full wpuf-rounded-md wpuf-py-1.5 wpuf-text-gray-900 wpuf-shadow-sm placeholder:wpuf-text-gray-400 sm:wpuf-text-sm sm:wpuf-leading-6 wpuf-border !wpuf-border-gray-300" + :class="[ + 'wpuf-form-control', // New shared class + 'wpuf-select-field' // Field-specific class + ]"admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text-meta/template.php (1)
12-12: Review CSS specificity overridesThe use of
!(important) flags in CSS classes (!wpuf-shadow-sm,!wpuf-border,!wpuf-border-gray-300) suggests potential specificity issues. Consider refactoring the CSS architecture to avoid specificity battles.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text/template.php (2)
15-15: Refactor duplicate class bindingsThe
builder_class_names('text')is duplicated for both input variations. Consider extracting common attributes to reduce duplication.+ <template v-if="option_field.variation && 'number' === option_field.variation"> <input - v-if="option_field.variation && 'number' === option_field.variation" type="number" v-model="value" @focusout="on_focusout" @keyup="on_keyup" :class="builder_class_names('text')"> + </template> + <template v-else> <input - v-if="!option_field.variation" type="text" v-model="value" @focusout="on_focusout" @keyup="on_keyup" :class="builder_class_names('text')"> + </template>Also applies to: 23-23
9-15: Consider combining event handlersThe input elements share identical event handlers. Consider creating a computed property or method that returns the common input attributes to reduce code duplication.
Example approach:
computed: { inputProps() { return { 'v-model': 'value', '@focusout': 'on_focusout', '@keyup': 'on_keyup', 'class': this.builder_class_names('text') } } }Then in template:
- v-model="value" - @focusout="on_focusout" - @keyup="on_keyup" - :class="builder_class_names('text')" + v-bind="inputProps"Also applies to: 17-23
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-section_break/template.php (1)
9-18: Consider adding aria-label for better accessibilityThe dashed section break implementation looks good, but could benefit from improved accessibility for screen readers.
Consider adding an aria-label to the outer div:
<div v-else-if="field.divider === 'dashed'" - class="wpuf-section-wrap"> + class="wpuf-section-wrap" + :aria-label="field.label + ' section'">admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-featured_image/template.php (1)
10-12: Consider adding aria-label for better accessibilityWhile the SVG icon enhances visual appeal, it should be accompanied by appropriate accessibility attributes.
- <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" fill="none" viewBox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="1.5" stroke="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5"> + <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" fill="none" viewBox="0 0 24 24" stroke-width="1.5" stroke="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5" aria-hidden="true" role="img">admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-checkbox_field/template.php (1)
36-36: Add ID to help text for ARIA associationThe help text should be properly associated with the form controls using ARIA attributes.
-<p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-html="field.help"></p> +<p v-if="field.help" :id="`${field.name}-help`" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-html="field.help"></p>admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-radio_field/template.php (2)
2-32: Reduce code duplication in radio button layoutsThe inline and non-inline layouts share similar code structure. Consider extracting common parts into a reusable template or component.
+ <!-- Create a new component RadioOption.vue --> + <template> + <div class="wpuf-flex wpuf-items-center"> + <input + type="radio" + :class="getInputClasses()" + class="wpuf-border-gray-300 wpuf-text-indigo-600"> + <label + :value="value" + :checked="checked" + :class="[ + 'wpuf-ml-3 wpuf-block wpuf-text-sm wpuf-font-medium wpuf-leading-6 wpuf-text-gray-900', + ...labelClasses + ]"> + {{ label }} + </label> + </div> + </template>
10-10: Avoid using !important in CSS classesThe use of
!wpuf-m-0suggests specificity issues in the CSS. Consider:
- Restructuring CSS to avoid specificity conflicts
- Using more specific selectors if necessary
Also applies to: 25-25
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-radio/template.php (2)
28-29: Standardize spacing classesThe margin class
wpuf-ml-2is conditionally applied using a ternary. Consider using a CSS Grid or Flexbox gap for consistent spacing.- :class="index !== 0 ? 'wpuf-ml-2' : ''" + class="wpuf-gap-x-2" <!-- Add to parent div -->
13-18: Enhance radio button accessibilityAdd
aria-labeloraria-labelledbyattributes to improve screen reader support.<input type="radio" :value="key" v-model="value" + :aria-label="option" class="checked:!wpuf-bg-primary checked:before:!wpuf-bg-transparent">Also applies to: 30-35
admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/add-form-field.js (1)
49-54: LGTM! Consider extracting common CSS classes.The computed property implementation is clean and follows Vue.js best practices. However, since these classes might be reused across components, consider extracting them into a shared constants file or utility function.
+ // constants/styles.js + export const BUTTON_CLASSES = { + ACTION: 'wpuf-p-2 hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer hover:wpuf-text-white' + }; computed: { action_button_classes: function() { - return 'wpuf-p-2 hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer hover:wpuf-text-white'; + return BUTTON_CLASSES.ACTION; } },admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/template.php (2)
9-15: LGTM! Consider enhancing accessibility.The dynamic styling and layout implementation looks good. However, consider adding ARIA attributes for better accessibility.
<h3 :class="show_basic_settings ? 'wpuf-text-green-600' : 'wpuf-text-gray-500'" class="wpuf-flex wpuf-mt-0 wpuf-mb-6 wpuf-justify-between hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer wpuf-text-sm" - @click="show_basic_settings = !show_basic_settings"> + @click="show_basic_settings = !show_basic_settings" + role="button" + :aria-expanded="show_basic_settings" + :aria-controls="'basic-settings-content'">
32-37: Apply the same accessibility improvements here.For consistency, apply the same ARIA attributes to the advanced settings section.
<h3 :class="show_advanced_settings ? 'wpuf-text-green-600' : 'wpuf-text-gray-500'" class="wpuf-flex wpuf-mt-0 wpuf-mb-6 wpuf-justify-between hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer wpuf-text-sm" - @click="show_advanced_settings = !show_advanced_settings"> + @click="show_advanced_settings = !show_advanced_settings" + role="button" + :aria-expanded="show_advanced_settings" + :aria-controls="'advanced-settings-content'">admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.js (1)
9-9: Consider using a more descriptive default value.The default value
{ key: 'value' }seems generic. Consider using a more meaningful default that better represents the field structure.- default: () => ({ key: 'value' }) + default: () => ({ + name: '', + type: 'text', + value: '' + })admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-visibility/template.php (1)
50-51: Consider extracting checkbox styles to a CSS classThe checkbox styling attributes are repeated multiple times. Consider extracting these to a reusable CSS class to maintain consistency and reduce duplication.
- $output .= "<label><input class='wpuf-bg-transparent wpuf-text-white checked:wpuf-bg-transparent checked:wpuf-shadow-primary checked:hover:wpuf-shadow-transparent checked:focus:wpuf-bg-transparent' type='checkbox' v-model='choices' value='{$role}'> {$role_name} </label>"; + $checkbox_class = 'wpuf-checkbox wpuf-bg-transparent wpuf-text-white checked:wpuf-bg-transparent checked:wpuf-shadow-primary checked:hover:wpuf-shadow-transparent checked:focus:wpuf-bg-transparent'; + $output .= "<label><input class='{$checkbox_class}' type='checkbox' v-model='choices' value='{$role}'> {$role_name} </label>";admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-fields-v4-1/index.js (2)
31-36: Consider using Vue's built-in drag-and-drop directivesWhile jQuery UI draggable works, consider migrating to Vue's native drag-and-drop directives for better integration with the Vue ecosystem and reduced dependencies.
91-113: Optimize search implementationThe current search implementation has some potential improvements:
- Remove unnecessary
selfalias as arrow functions inheritthis- Consider debouncing the search to improve performance
- Consider memoizing the filtered results
watch: { - searched_fields: function ( searchValue ) { - var self = this; + searched_fields: _.debounce(function(searchValue) { this.set_default_panel_sections(); if (this.searched_fields === '') { return; } - const matchedFields = Object.keys( self.field_settings ).filter( key => - self.field_settings[key].title.toLowerCase().includes( searchValue.toLowerCase() ) + const matchedFields = Object.keys(this.field_settings).filter(key => + this.field_settings[key].title.toLowerCase().includes(searchValue.toLowerCase()) ); - const updatedStructure = self.panel_sections.map(section => ({ + const updatedStructure = this.panel_sections.map(section => ({ id: section.id, title: section.title, show: section.show, fields: section.fields.filter(field => matchedFields.includes(field)) })); this.$store.commit('set_panel_sections', updatedStructure); - } + }, 300) }🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
[error] 93-93: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
Lib/Appsero/Client.php (1)
168-168: LGTM! Consider documenting parameter meanings.The explicit parameters
true, falseforget_plugin_data()make the intention clearer. The first parameter enables HTML markup in the output, while the second disables translation, which is appropriate for this context as the data is used programmatically.Consider adding a brief comment explaining the parameter choices:
- $plugin_data = get_plugin_data( $this->file, true, false ); + // Enable markup but disable translation as data is used programmatically + $plugin_data = get_plugin_data( $this->file, true, false );admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-fields-v4-1/template.php (2)
4-10: Enhance accessibility for the search input field.The search input should include ARIA attributes for better screen reader support.
<input type="text" name="search" id="search" v-model="searched_fields" + aria-label="<?php esc_attr_e( 'Search Field', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?>" + role="searchbox" class="!wpuf-border-none wpuf-rounded-lg wpuf-block wpuf-min-w-0 wpuf-grow wpuf-px-4 wpuf-py-1.5 wpuf-text-base wpuf-text-gray-900 placeholder:wpuf-text-gray-400 sm:wpuf-text-sm/6 !wpuf-shadow-none !wpuf-ring-transparent" placeholder="<?php esc_attr_e( 'Search Field', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?>">
52-68: Improve pro feature alert UX.The pro feature alert should provide more context about the feature's benefits and how to unlock it.
<div v-if="is_pro_feature(field)" :data-form-field="field" data-source="panel" - @click="alert_pro_feature(field)" + @click="show_pro_feature_details(field)" + role="button" + tabindex="0" + :aria-label="field_settings[field].title + ' - Pro Feature'" class="wpuf-relative wpuf-flex wpuf-items-center wpuf-rounded-lg wpuf-border wpuf-border-gray-200 wpuf-bg-white wpuf-shadow-sm hover:wpuf-border-gray-300 wpuf-p-3">includes/Fields/Form_Pro_Upgrade_Fields.php (1)
69-69: Replace WPUF_SINCE placeholder with actual version.The @SInCE tag uses a placeholder constant that should be replaced with the actual version number.
- * @since WPUF_SINCE + * @since 4.0.0includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Form_Template.php (1)
85-89: Consider extracting version comparison logic.The version comparison with '4.1' is repeated in multiple places. Consider extracting this into a class constant or method for better maintainability.
class Form_Template { + private const VERSION_THRESHOLD = '4.1'; + + private function is_legacy_version(): bool { + return defined('WPUF_PRO_VERSION') && + version_compare(WPUF_PRO_VERSION, self::VERSION_THRESHOLD, '<'); + } public function enqueue_scripts() { - if (defined('WPUF_PRO_VERSION') && version_compare(WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<')) { + if ($this->is_legacy_version()) { wp_enqueue_style('wpuf-form-builder'); } else { wp_enqueue_style('wpuf-admin-form-builder'); } }Also applies to: 112-118
Gruntfile.js (1)
3-5: Consider using glob patterns for file mapping.The
tailwindFileMapuses hard-coded file paths. Consider using glob patterns for more flexible file matching.const tailwindFileMap = { - 'admin/form-builder/views/form-builder-v4.1.php': 'admin/form-builder.css', + 'admin/form-builder/views/*.php': 'admin/form-builder.css', }includes/Frontend_Render_Form.php (1)
303-309: LGTM with a minor suggestion for class naming.The implementation correctly uses printf for localization and proper escaping. However, there's a minor inconsistency in the HTML class naming.
Consider renaming the class from
wpuf-items-table-containermessage-boxtowpuf-items-message-boxfor better clarity and consistency:-<span class="wpuf-items-table-containermessage-box" id="remaining-feature-item"> +<span class="wpuf-items-message-box" id="remaining-feature-item">📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (10)
assets/images/recaptcha-placeholder.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngassets/images/templates/blank.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgassets/images/templates/edd.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngassets/images/templates/edd.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgassets/images/templates/event.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgassets/images/templates/post.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngassets/images/templates/post.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgassets/images/templates/woocommerce.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngassets/images/templates/woocommerce.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgpackage-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json📒 Files selected for processing (82)
Gruntfile.js(5 hunks)Lib/Appsero/Client.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-checkbox/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-checkbox/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-multiselect/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-pro-feature-alert/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/template.php(2 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-radio/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-select/index.js(2 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-select/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text-meta/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-textarea/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-visibility/template.php(3 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-checkbox_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-column_field/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-column_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-custom_hidden_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-dropdown_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-email_address/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-featured_image/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-fields-v4-1/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-fields-v4-1/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-image_upload/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-multiple_select/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_content/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_excerpt/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_tags/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_title/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-radio_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-recaptcha/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-section_break/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-taxonomy/template.php(3 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-text_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-textarea_field/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-website_url/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/help-text/index.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/help-text/template.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/form-builder.js(13 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/add-form-field.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.js(3 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/option-field.js(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/assets/less/form-builder.less(0 hunks)admin/form-builder/views/form-builder-v4.1.php(1 hunks)admin/form-builder/views/form-builder.php(2 hunks)assets/css/admin.css(0 hunks)assets/css/frontend-forms.css(1 hunks)assets/js-templates/form-components.php(17 hunks)assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-components.js(8 hunks)assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.js(5 hunks)assets/js/wpuf-form-builder.js(13 hunks)assets/less/admin.less(0 hunks)assets/less/frontend-forms.less(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Admin_Form.php(4 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Admin_Form_Builder.php(3 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Form_Template.php(3 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_Events_Calendar.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_Post.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_WooCommerce.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Pro_Form_Preview_EDD.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Forms/Template_Post.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Menu.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/Posting.php(2 hunks)includes/Admin/template-parts/modal-v4.1.php(1 hunks)includes/Admin/template-parts/modal.php(5 hunks)includes/Admin/views/post-form.php(1 hunks)includes/Assets.php(1 hunks)includes/Fields/Field_Contract.php(2 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_Cloudflare_Turnstile.php(1 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_Featured_Image.php(1 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_Post_Title.php(2 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_SectionBreak.php(1 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_Textarea.php(1 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Field_reCaptcha.php(0 hunks)includes/Fields/Form_Pro_Upgrade_Fields.php(2 hunks)includes/Frontend_Render_Form.php(1 hunks)⛔ Files not processed due to max files limit (7)
- includes/Setup_Wizard.php
- languages/wp-user-frontend.pot
- package.json
- src/css/admin/form-builder.css
- tailwind.config.js
- tests/chrome_recordings/post form templates.json
- wpuf-functions.php
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (4)
- admin/form-builder/assets/less/form-builder.less
- assets/css/admin.css
- includes/Fields/Form_Field_reCaptcha.php
- assets/less/admin.less
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (7)
- includes/Admin/template-parts/modal.php
- includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_Events_Calendar.php
- includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_WooCommerce.php
- admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/help-text/template.php
- admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-multiple_select/template.php
- admin/form-builder/views/form-builder.php
- includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Post_Form_Template_Post.php
👮 Files not reviewed due to content moderation or server errors (6)
- assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.js
- admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-column_field/index.js
- includes/Admin/Forms/Admin_Form_Builder.php
- includes/Fields/Field_Contract.php
- assets/less/frontend-forms.less
- assets/css/frontend-forms.css
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Biome (1.9.4)
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-fields-v4-1/index.js
[error] 70-70: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 93-93: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-components.js
[error] 334-334: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 334-334: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 357-357: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 365-365: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 303-303: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
[error] 1612-1612: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 1635-1635: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/index.js
[error] 146-146: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 146-146: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 169-169: Change to an optional chain.
Unsafe fix: Change to an optional chain.
(lint/complexity/useOptionalChain)
[error] 177-177: Unnecessary use of boolean literals in conditional expression.
Simplify your code by directly assigning the result without using a ternary operator.
If your goal is negation, you may use the logical NOT (!) or double NOT (!!) operator for clearer and concise code.
Check for more details about NOT operator.
Unsafe fix: Remove the conditional expression with(lint/complexity/noUselessTernary)
[error] 115-115: This aliasing of this is unnecessary.
Arrow functions inherits
thisfrom their enclosing scope.
Safe fix: Use this instead of an alias.(lint/complexity/noUselessThisAlias)
admin/form-builder/assets/js/form-builder.js
[error] 530-530: Shouldn't redeclare 'settings_tabs'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'settings_tabs' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
[error] 538-538: Shouldn't redeclare 'clipboard'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'clipboard' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
[error] 541-541: Shouldn't redeclare 'self'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'self' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder.js
[error] 530-530: Shouldn't redeclare 'settings_tabs'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'settings_tabs' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
[error] 538-538: Shouldn't redeclare 'clipboard'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'clipboard' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
[error] 541-541: Shouldn't redeclare 'self'. Consider to delete it or rename it.
'self' is defined here:
(lint/suspicious/noRedeclare)
🔇 Additional comments (82)
includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Pro_Form_Preview_EDD.php (2)
30-30: Good choice upgrading to SVG format!Switching from PNG to SVG is a good improvement as SVG provides:
- Better scaling across different screen resolutions
- Typically smaller file size
- Crisp rendering on high DPI displays
30-30: Verify the SVG asset existsLet's ensure the SVG file is properly placed in the assets directory.
✅ Verification successful
SVG asset exists and is properly placed
The SVG file
edd.svgis present at the correct locationassets/images/templates/edd.svg, matching the path referenced in the code.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the existence of the SVG file and check for similar template files # that might need the same update # Check if the SVG file exists fd -e svg "edd.svg$" assets/images/templates/ # Look for other template files that might need similar updates rg -l "\.png'" includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Length of output: 204
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-website_url/template.php (1)
9-9: LGTM! Improved help text semantics and stylingGood improvements:
- Using
<p>instead of<span>is more semantic for help text- Utility classes enhance visual hierarchy and maintainability
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-image_upload/template.php (2)
4-6: LGTM! Verify styling consistency across themes.The new utility-first CSS classes improve maintainability and alignment. The dynamic class binding through
builder_class_namesprovides good flexibility for styling variations.✅ Verification successful
The results show that the utility classes are consistently used across multiple components in the codebase, including form builder components, subscription components, and Vue templates. The CSS classes are properly defined in the form builder CSS files (
src/css/admin/form-builder.cssandassets/css/admin/form-builder.css).Let's verify the actual CSS implementation to ensure proper styling:
Styling implementation is consistent and properly defined
The utility classes are well-implemented with proper CSS definitions in the form builder stylesheets. The classes follow a consistent pattern:
wpuf-inline-flexmaps todisplay: inline-flexwpuf-items-centermaps toalign-items: center- Responsive variants are properly handled (e.g.,
sm:wpuf-items-center)- Classes are namespaced with
wpuf-prefix to avoid conflicts with themes🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent usage of new CSS classes across components # and potential style conflicts with WordPress themes # Check for usage of new utility classes across components rg -l "wpuf-(inline-flex|items-center|gap-x-1\.5)" # Check for any existing theme-specific overrides rg -l "\.wpuf-(inline-flex|items-center|gap-x-1\.5)" --type cssLength of output: 2207
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the CSS implementation of these utility classes rg "wpuf-(inline-flex|items-center|gap-x-1\.5)" --type css -A 2Length of output: 672
23-23: Verify sanitization of help text content.While the semantic change to
<p>and styling improvements are good, usingv-htmlwith potentially unsanitized content could pose an XSS risk.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-textarea_field/template.php (2)
16-16: Verify the new utility classesThe semantic change from
<span>to<p>is good. Let's verify that the new utility classes (wpuf-mt-2,wpuf-text-sm,wpuf-text-gray-500) are properly defined in the CSS.✅ Verification successful
Utility classes are properly defined and available
The utility classes are correctly defined in the CSS files:
wpuf-mt-2is defined inassets/css/admin/form-builder.csswith margin-top: 0.5remwpuf-text-smis defined with font-size: 0.875rem and line-height: 1.25remwpuf-text-gray-500is defined with the appropriate gray color using RGB valuesThese classes appear to be part of a well-structured utility-first CSS framework used throughout the codebase, following Tailwind CSS naming conventions. The semantic change and styling are appropriate.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the utility classes are defined in the CSS files # Search for the utility class definitions rg -A 2 "wpuf-(mt-2|text-sm|text-gray-500)" admin/form-builder/assets/css/Length of output: 147
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try searching in the entire repository for these utility classes # First, let's find all CSS files fd -e css -x rg -l "wpuf-(mt-2|text-sm|text-gray-500)" {} # Also search for any potential SCSS/LESS files that might define these utilities fd -e scss -e less -x rg -l "wpuf-(mt-2|text-sm|text-gray-500)" {} # Let's also check if there's a build process that generates these classes fd -g "package.json" -g "webpack.*.js" -g "tailwind.config.*" -x cat {}Length of output: 439
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the content of the CSS files that matched to see the actual definitions rg -A 2 "wpuf-(mt-2|text-sm|text-gray-500)" ./src/css/admin/form-builder.css ./assets/css/admin/form-builder.css # Also let's check if these classes are used elsewhere in the codebase rg "class=.*wpuf-(mt-2|text-sm|text-gray-500)"Length of output: 35756
5-5: Verify the builder_class_names mixin implementationThe changes look good, but let's ensure the new
builder_class_namesfunction is properly defined in thewpuf_mixins.form_field_mixin.Also applies to: 8-8
✅ Verification successful
The changes are correctly implemented and consistent
The verification confirms:
- The
builder_class_namesfunction is properly defined in the form-field mixin with specific handling for textarea fields- The
:defaultbinding is used correctly in the textarea component- The implementation is unique to this textarea component and doesn't require changes elsewhere
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the builder_class_names function implementation # Search for the mixin definition and its usage across components # Check for the mixin definition rg -A 5 "builder_class_names.*function" admin/form-builder/assets/js/ # Check for consistent usage across other field components ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names($$$)' admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/Length of output: 646
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check for the complete implementation of builder_class_names function rg -A 15 'builder_class_names.*function' admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.js # Check for usage of :default and builder_class_names in textarea field template cat admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-textarea_field/template.php # Check for any other components using similar pattern rg -l ':default="field.default"' admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/Length of output: 1592
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-taxonomy/template.php (3)
10-12: LGTM! Consistent class naming implementation.The changes maintain consistency with other select fields while preserving the existing functionality.
4-6: Verify XSS protection and class naming implementation.While the class naming centralization is good, using
v-htmlfor dropdown options could pose XSS risks if the content isn't properly sanitized.Let's verify the implementation:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the term data handling and builder_class_names implementation:
XSS risk is mitigated through proper term data handling
The implementation shows that the dropdown options are generated from properly structured term objects with controlled properties (id, name, term_id). The data undergoes several safety measures:
- Terms are filtered and processed through structured methods
- Values are explicitly parsed as integers where needed
- Term properties are accessed directly rather than through user input
- The hierarchy building process uses controlled term properties
Additionally, the
builder_class_namesappears to be consistently used across multiple components for class binding, suggesting it's a standardized utility.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the builder_class_names mixin implementation ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names' # Check if term dropdown options are sanitized rg -A 5 "get_term_dropdown_options"Length of output: 5895
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check how terms are fetched and processed rg -A 10 "terms.*=" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-taxonomy/ # Check for escaping/sanitization utilities rg -A 3 "escape|sanitize|clean" admin/form-builder/assets/js/ # Look for builder_class_names implementation in mixins or utils rg -A 5 "builder_class_names.*=" admin/form-builder/assets/js/Length of output: 9913
40-42: Consider adding input validation for the size attribute.While the dynamic bindings enhance customization, ensure that the
field.sizevalue is validated to prevent invalid size values.Let's check the field validation implementation:
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/template.php (2)
7-22: Alignment & spacing are well-structured
The flex layout for showing and syncing values is clean and readable, nicely grouping the checkboxes with their labels. Good job!
36-50: Ensure robust uniqueness for v-for loops
The top-level array iteration on line 38 uses “option.id” as the key. Make sure it’s guaranteed to be unique for each option. If it’s conceivable that “option.id” might be duplicated, consider generating a unique key or using “index” plus “id.”admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/index.js (3)
4-5: Nice usage of mixins
Including both general builder-stage mixins and add_form_field mixin ensures well-organized logic.
25-27: Confirm that the pro_link is always available
It’s referencing “wpuf_form_builder.pro_link.” If there’s any chance this variable can be undefined, consider a fallback or a guard to avoid unexpected runtime errors.
30-82: Drag-and-drop logic looks robust
You’re successfully managing droppable areas and column fields. Great use of jQuery UI’s sortable “update” and “over” events.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-column_field/template.php (3)
1-4: Responsive design approach looks solid
Thewpuf-flexandwpuf-min-w-0classes effectively ensure the columns adapt to different screen sizes. This is a good use of utility-first classes.
5-21: Drag-and-drop container
The class “wpuf-column-inner-fields” plus “sortable-list” suggests some dynamic reordering. Confirm these items remain fully usable on mobile—some mobile browsers can be tricky with drag-and-drop.
22-41: Check field collision
You’re merging multiple classes (lines 14–20) to compute dynamic classes for each field. Ensure conflicting styles or naming collisions don’t happen if two classes define the same property differently.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/builder-stage-v4-1/template.php (5)
1-4: Empty state message is helpful
Showing a quick tip (“Add fields by dragging...”) guides new users effectively.
6-20: Improve naming consistency
If “sortable-list” is used in other places, confirm consistent naming in CSS and remove any unused references to avoid confusion.
24-32: Responsive layout
The usage of “wpuf-w-1/4” vs. “wpuf-w-3/4” is consistent with your two-column approach. Great job leveraging utility classes.
50-53: Column field switching
The conditional check “field.input_type === 'column_field'” is a neat approach to toggling multiple layouts. Ensure no references to deprecated type keys remain in other files, especially if “column_field_v2” was used previously.
115-120: Custom submit area
The do_action hook at line 119 is a great way to allow extensibility from external plugins or themes.admin/form-builder/views/form-builder-v4.1.php (3)
1-4: Ensure Backend Validation or Nonce ChecksThe form’s method is “post” and it uses @submit.prevent on the Vue side, but ensure that robust backend validation is also in place beyond the nonce check to prevent unauthorized submissions or tampering.
130-145: Confirm Two-Way Binding Strategy for enableMultistep“enableMultistep” is a local reactive property. Verify if it needs to be persisted in the Vuex store or in DB settings to maintain the toggle state across sessions or refreshes.
153-154: Check Registration of builder-stage-v4-1 ComponentConfirm that the JavaScript registering 'builder-stage-v4-1' is properly enqueued and loaded on this page. Otherwise, the component may fail to render.
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder.js (4)
44-46: Validate is_post_form LogicYou set “is_post_form” by checking both “is_older_form” and post type. Confirm that this logic correctly handles edge cases where forms of different post types might also need the “post form” behavior.
73-73: Ensure editing_field_id Reset is DesiredResetting “editing_field_id” to 0 when switching to 'form-fields' or 'form-fields-v4-1' might disrupt user flow if the user was in the middle of editing. Confirm that this is the intended user experience.
245-245: Confirm Current Panel Reversion on Field DeletionWhen a field is deleted, the code reverts “current_panel” to 'form-fields' or 'form-fields-v4-1.' Confirm whether that is the desired behavior if a user was on “field-options.”
489-525: Check Lifecycle for Post Form HandlingIn the mounted hook, the code branches to handle “is_post_form.” Ensure all tab logic, event bindings, and particularly the clipboard code are invoked where needed for non-post forms.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/form-builder.js (4)
44-46: Clarify is_post_form AssignmentLine 45 sets is_post_form using is_older_form and post_type. Make sure this condition is correct for non-legacy forms that might also be “wpuf_forms.”
73-73: Conditional Check for Field-OptionsIn set_current_panel, the logic sets “editing_field_id = 0” when entering 'form-fields' or 'form-fields-v4-1.' This might disrupt partially updated fields. Double-check if this is expected.
245-245: Confirm UI Flow Upon DeletionWhen deleting a field, the code sets “current_panel” to 'form-fields' or 'form-fields-v4-1.' Confirm that returning to that panel after a field removal is consistent with desired UX.
392-392: Return to Panel on Column Field DeletionSimilar to line 245, the logic reverts “current_panel” to a default. Validate if users should remain on “field-options” panel or if the revert is desired.
assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-components.js (2)
189-216: Introduced builder-stage-v4-1This new component parallels “builder-stage” with minimal differences. Verify that any optional lifecycle hooks or watchers from the original “builder-stage” are duplicated if needed.
612-612: Check Mixin Suitability in field-optionsYou have “mixins: [wpuf_mixins.field_options, wpuf_mixins.form_field_mixin].” Ensure that both mixins do not override each other’s behavior inadvertently.
assets/js-templates/form-components.php (3)
283-290: Double-check property bindings for checkboxes.
The panel-field-opt-checkbox logic references options keyed by numeric or string keys. Ensure that v-model usage aligns with the correct key types, especially if future code extends or changes these options.
757-772: Uniform horizontal vs. vertical checkbox layout logic.
You handle inline vs. block checkboxes here. Confirm that your design guidelines or product specs want them to look different from the older implementation or if there’s a chance to unify these approaches to remain consistent.
95-133: Ensure numeric parsing consistency for editing_form_id checks.
You’re calling parseInt on both editing_form_id and field.id. If editing_form_id or field.id can ever be undefined or a non-numeric string, it could lead to NaN comparisons. Confirm that these values are always set to numeric types in the upstream code, or implement defensive checks to avoid potential runtime issues.includes/Admin/views/post-form.php (1)
1-11: Check version comparison for correctness.
The condition checks if WPUF_PRO_VERSION < 4.1. If WPUF_PRO_VERSION is empty or invalid, the else path is triggered. Make sure that’s intended. Sometimes plugin version mismatches can cause unexpected behavior.✅ Verification successful
Version comparison is correctly implemented and consistently used across the codebase
The version comparison check
defined('WPUF_PRO_VERSION') && version_compare(WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<')is consistently implemented across multiple files in the codebase. This pattern is used to:
- Handle different form builder views and styles
- Load appropriate templates
- Manage asset enqueueing
The condition is safe as it:
- First checks if the constant is defined before comparing
- Consistently uses version 4.1 as the comparison point
- Falls back to newer implementations when version is >= 4.1 or when PRO version isn't defined
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Searching for references to WPUF_PRO_VERSION usage across the codebase rg "WPUF_PRO_VERSION" -A 5Length of output: 3889
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-text_field/template.php (1)
7-9: Improved class binding for text fields.
Switching to builder_class_names('textfield') makes it consistent with the new naming convention. Ensure you apply the same approach to all field types for uniform styling, or keep fallback references if older references remain in the codebase.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-custom_hidden_field/template.php (1)
4-9: Leverage hidden field styling for clarity.
Using builder_class_names('text_hidden') aligns with the updated convention. If the “hidden” nature is critical for front-end usage, consider verifying that these fields don’t appear to end users or search engines in actual forms.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-textarea/template.php (1)
5-5: LGTM! Verify builder_class_names implementationThe switch to
builder_class_namesaligns with the form builder UI enhancement objectives and should provide more consistent styling.✅ Verification successful
LGTM! builder_class_names implementation is correct
The switch from
class_namestobuilder_class_namesis properly implemented in the form builder mixins. The method handles textarea fields correctly by applying consistent styling classes including responsive design, text colors, shadows, and borders. The implementation aligns with the UI enhancement objectives.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the builder_class_names method implementation ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names($_)'Length of output: 46
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for builder_class_names with ripgrep for a broader search rg "builder_class_names" -A 2 -B 2 # Also search for class_names to understand the pattern rg "class_names" -A 2 -B 2Length of output: 54177
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for builder_class_names implementation ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names: function($_) { $$$ }' # Also search for the implementation with ripgrep for backup rg "builder_class_names: function" -A 10Length of output: 1770
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get the full implementation of builder_class_names rg "builder_class_names: function" -A 30 "admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.js"Length of output: 1448
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-email_address/template.php (2)
9-9: LGTM! Improved help text structureGood improvements:
- Using semantic
<p>tag instead of<span>- Consistent utility classes for styling
- Proper spacing with wpuf-mt-2
4-4: Ensure safe class name concatenationThe concatenation of class names could potentially result in invalid class strings if either method returns undefined.
Consider using an array or template literal for safer class concatenation:
-:class="class_names('email') + builder_class_names('text')" +:class="[class_names('email'), builder_class_names('text')]"✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I found the implementations of both
class_namesandbuilder_class_namesmethods in the codebase. Here's what I found:
class_namesmethod inadmin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.jsreturns an array of classes:class_names: function(type_class) { return [ type_class, this.required_class(), 'wpuf_' + this.field.name + '_' + this.form_id ]; }
builder_class_namesmethod in the same file returns common classes based on the type:builder_class_names: function(type_class) { var commonClasses = ''; switch (type_class) { case 'text': case 'textfield': // ... } }Since both methods are properly implemented and the concatenation is being used widely across multiple components in the codebase (as seen in the search results), this is a safe pattern that's already established in the project.
No issues with class name concatenation
The concatenation of
class_names('email')withbuilder_class_names('text')is safe as both methods are properly implemented and return valid values. This pattern is consistently used across multiple components in the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for class_names and builder_class_names implementations ast-grep --pattern 'class_names($_)' ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names($_)'Length of output: 85
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for class_names and builder_class_names function definitions using ripgrep echo "=== Searching for class_names function ===" rg -A 5 "class_names\s*=?\s*function" echo "=== Searching for builder_class_names function ===" rg -A 5 "builder_class_names\s*=?\s*function" echo "=== Searching for Vue component definitions that might contain these methods ===" rg -A 10 "methods:\s*{" --type jsLength of output: 588
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for class_names and builder_class_names using simpler patterns echo "=== Searching for class_names usage and definition ===" rg "class_names" -A 5 echo "=== Searching for builder_class_names usage and definition ===" rg "builder_class_names" -A 5 echo "=== Searching for Vue methods block ===" rg "methods: {" -A 10Length of output: 62549
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-recaptcha/template.php (2)
7-7: LGTM! Improved conditional renderingGood improvements:
- Using strict comparison (!==)
- Simplified template structure
- Clear alt text for accessibility
7-7: Verify WPUF_ASSET_URI constant availabilityEnsure the PHP constant is properly defined before template rendering.
✅ Verification successful
WPUF_ASSET_URI constant is properly defined
The constant
WPUF_ASSET_URIis defined in the main plugin filewpuf.phpasWPUF_ROOT_URI . '/assets'. Since this is defined in the main plugin file, it will be available throughout the plugin's execution, including template files.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for WPUF_ASSET_URI constant definition rg -g '*.php' "define.*WPUF_ASSET_URI"Length of output: 214
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if wpuf.php is included/required before the template rg -g '*.php' -B 5 "require.*form-recaptcha/template\.php|include.*form-recaptcha/template\.php"Length of output: 98
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check how this template is being loaded and verify the constant's availability rg -g '*.php' "form-recaptcha/template" -B 5Length of output: 44
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-pro-feature-alert/template.php (1)
1-6: LGTM! UI improvements enhance user experience.The changes improve the pro feature alert's visual presentation and accessibility through:
- Proper flexbox layout
- Clear typography with appropriate text sizes and colors
- Tooltip implementation for better user feedback
- Semantic HTML structure
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_title/template.php (1)
10-10: LGTM! Semantic markup improvement.The change from
<span>to<p>for help text improves accessibility and semantic structure.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_tags/template.php (2)
11-11: LGTM! Consistent help text implementation.The help text implementation matches the pattern used in other form components, maintaining consistency in the UI.
4-5: Verify class binding consistency across form components.Let's check if other form components follow similar patterns.
Also applies to: 7-8
✅ Verification successful
Let me fix the regex and gather more information about class bindings.
Class binding implementation is consistent across form components
The verification shows that class bindings are consistently implemented across the form components:
- Form input components consistently use either
builder_class_names()orclass_names()for dynamic class binding- The Tailwind utility classes are consistently applied, as seen in similar components like post_title and post_tags
- The pattern
:class="builder_class_names('text')"combined with base Tailwind classes is used consistently for text-like inputs🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check class binding methods and Tailwind classes across form components # Check for different class binding methods echo "Checking class binding methods..." rg -t php "(:class=\"(class_names|builder_class_names)" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/ # Check for duplicate Tailwind classes echo "Checking Tailwind utility classes..." rg -t php "class=\"wpuf-block wpuf-w-full wpuf-rounded-md" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/Length of output: 989
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check class binding methods and Tailwind classes across form components # Check for different class binding methods with escaped quotes echo "Checking class binding methods..." rg -t php ":class=\".*?\"" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/ # Check for builder_class_names usage echo "Checking builder_class_names usage..." rg -t php "builder_class_names" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/ # Check for class_names usage echo "Checking class_names usage..." rg -t php "class_names" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/Length of output: 18339
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_excerpt/template.php (2)
13-13: LGTM: Improved help text structureGood improvement in semantic HTML by changing from
spantopwith proper Tailwind utility classes for consistent styling.
4-4: Verify builder_class_names method availabilityThe change from
class_namestobuilder_class_namesand addition of:default_textbinding looks good, but let's ensure the builder_class_names method is properly defined.Also applies to: 6-6
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that the
builder_class_namesmethod is properly defined in the form-field mixin atadmin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.jsand is widely used across multiple form components in the codebase. The method is also defined inassets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.js, suggesting it's a core functionality used throughout the form builder.The change from
class_namestobuilder_class_namesappears to be part of a consistent pattern, as both methods exist in the codebase and serve different purposes -class_namesfor basic class assignments andbuilder_class_namesfor builder-specific styling.The change is valid and properly supported by the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for builder_class_names method definition ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names'Length of output: 40
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for builder_class_names using ripgrep for a broader search rg -i "builder_class_names" -A 3 -B 3Length of output: 29986
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for class_names (original method) to understand the context rg -i "class_names" -A 3 -B 3Length of output: 42098
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Look for Vue component or mixin definitions that might contain these methods rg -i "methods:\s*{" -A 10 -B 3Length of output: 121
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-multiselect/template.php (1)
1-1: LGTM: Improved conditional rendering and stylingGood improvements:
- Changed to
v-iffor better performance when the component is rarely toggled- Added Tailwind classes for consistent styling
Also applies to: 8-9
✅ Verification successful
z-index hierarchy is consistent with other components
The z-index value of 30 (
wpuf-z-30) in the multiselect component aligns with the established pattern in the codebase:
- Used for dropdown/select components (field-select also uses
wpuf-z-30)- Higher than overlay elements (
wpuf-z-10)- Lower than critical UI elements like popups (
wpuf-z-50)🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for z-index hierarchy in other components rg "wpuf-z-\d+" --type php --type jsLength of output: 5895
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-checkbox/template.php (2)
1-1: LGTM: Consistent spacing improvementsThe addition of utility classes
wpuf-mb-6andwpuf-mt-2improves the vertical spacing consistency in the form builder UI, aligning with the PR's objective of enhancing the interface.Also applies to: 6-6
8-8: Verify dynamic class binding implementationThe dynamic class binding using
builder_class_names('checkbox')looks good, but let's verify its implementation.✅ Verification successful
Dynamic class binding implementation is consistent across components
The
builder_class_names()method is consistently used across multiple form field components for class binding, including:
- Checkbox fields (both in form-builder and form-components)
- Text fields
- Textarea fields
- Select fields
- URL fields
- Email fields
- Upload buttons
- Hidden fields
The implementation follows a consistent pattern where
builder_class_names()is used with specific field type identifiers ('checkbox', 'text', 'textareafield', etc.) to generate appropriate class names.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for builder_class_names mixin/method definition ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names($_) { $$$ }' # Search for any existing usage patterns rg 'builder_class_names\(' -A 2Length of output: 14123
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-dropdown_field/template.php (1)
13-13: LGTM: Improved help text presentationThe help text implementation with semantic HTML (
<p>) and appropriate styling classes improves readability and accessibility.admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text/index.js (1)
5-6: Verify mixin dependencies and functionalityThe addition of
form_field_mixinlooks good, but let's verify its implementation and any potential conflicts withoption_field_mixin.✅ Verification successful
Based on the shell script results, I can now generate the final response:
The mixin combination is safe to use
The code inspection shows that:
- Both mixins have different concerns and non-overlapping props:
option_field_mixinusesoption_fieldpropform_field_mixinusesfieldprop- This mixin combination is already used successfully in other components like:
- field-checkbox/index.js
- field-option-data/index.js
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for mixin definitions ast-grep --pattern 'wpuf_mixins = { $$$ }' # Check for any potential naming conflicts in methods rg -g '*.js' 'form_field_mixin|option_field_mixin' -A 5Length of output: 28098
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-section_break/template.php (1)
2-8: LGTM: Regular section break implementationThe regular section break implementation is well-structured with clear semantic HTML and proper use of Tailwind classes for styling.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-checkbox/index.js (1)
5-6: LGTM: Mixin addition enhances field functionalityThe addition of
form_field_mixinalongside the existingoption_field_mixinis appropriate and aligns with the PR's objective of enhancing field options functionality.Let's verify the mixin implementation across other field components:
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify the mixin implementation further by checking the actual usage pattern in these files.
Let me check one more pattern to ensure we catch all mixin implementations, as the previous regex might have been too strict.
Mixin implementation is consistent across field components
The verification shows that
form_field_mixinis consistently implemented alongsideoption_field_mixinin field components like checkbox, text, and option-data. The pattern of using both mixins together demonstrates a coherent approach to enhancing field functionality across the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for consistent mixin usage across field components rg -l "wpuf_mixins.form_field_mixin" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-*Length of output: 1023
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the mixin implementation pattern in the matched files rg "mixins: \[.*wpuf_mixins.form_field_mixin.*\]" -A 2 admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-*Length of output: 1073
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for mixin declarations with more flexible pattern rg "mixins.*\[" -A 2 admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-checkbox/index.js admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-text/index.js admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/index.js admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/index.jsLength of output: 1415
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-post_content/template.php (1)
2-13: LGTM: Enhanced image insertion UIThe image insertion implementation is well-structured with good visual feedback through the SVG icon and proper Tailwind styling.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/form-featured_image/template.php (2)
4-5: LGTM: Enhanced button styling with Tailwind CSSThe new classes improve button alignment and spacing while maintaining consistency with modern UI practices.
19-19: LGTM: Improved help text presentationThe help text styling is now more consistent with modern UI practices using Tailwind's utility classes.
includes/Fields/Form_Field_SectionBreak.php (1)
92-92: LGTM: New divider property addedThe addition of the 'divider' property with 'regular' value aligns with the PR objective of enhancing field options.
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-visibility/template.php (2)
2-7: LGTM: Improved field label layoutThe new flex container with proper spacing and font styling enhances readability and maintains consistency with modern UI patterns.
9-21: LGTM: Enhanced radio button stylingThe radio button implementation follows best practices:
- Proper label association
- Consistent spacing with gap utilities
- Clear visual hierarchy with font styling
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-option-data/index.js (1)
9-10: Verify mixin integration impactThe addition of
form_field_mixinalongsideoption_field_mixincould potentially cause conflicts in method overrides or property definitions.✅ Verification successful
No conflicts found between form_field_mixin and option_field_mixin
After analyzing both mixins, they serve different purposes and have distinct, non-overlapping functionality:
form_field_mixinprovides common form field rendering functionality (class names, required status)option_field_mixinhandles option field settings and dependenciesThe mixins have different:
- Props (
fieldvsoption_fieldandediting_form_field)- Computed properties (no overlaps)
- Methods (unique to each mixin's purpose)
Their combination in the field-option-data component is appropriate as it needs both form field rendering capabilities and option field handling.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for mixin definitions and potential conflicts echo "Searching for mixin definitions..." rg -A 10 "form_field_mixin\s*=\s*{" echo "Checking for potential method conflicts between mixins..." rg -A 5 "methods:\s*{" admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/Length of output: 503
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for mixin definitions with fixed regex echo "Searching for form_field_mixin definition..." rg "form_field_mixin.*=" -A 10 echo "Searching for option_field_mixin definition..." rg "option_field_mixin.*=" -A 10 echo "Checking methods in mixins directory..." find admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/ -type f -exec cat {} \;Length of output: 14210
admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/index.js (1)
7-7: Verify integration of form_field_mixinThe addition of
form_field_mixinto the mixins array enhances the field options component with additional field manipulation capabilities. However, we should verify that all required methods from the mixin are properly integrated.✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to find the mixin definition and potential method conflicts. I've modified the search patterns to be more precise and avoid regex parsing errors. This will help us verify:
- Where form_field_mixin is defined
- What methods exist in the field-options component
- Where wpuf_mixins is defined and what it contains
I found the location of form_field_mixin. Let's examine its contents and the methods in both mixins to verify proper integration and check for any potential conflicts.
I've found the form_field_mixin implementation which provides utility methods for field manipulation (class names, required status, selection state). Let's examine the field-options component and the field_options mixin to ensure there are no method conflicts and verify proper integration.
Integration of form_field_mixin is properly implemented
The form_field_mixin is correctly integrated into the field-options component. The mixin provides utility methods for field manipulation (class_names, required_class, is_selected) and computed properties (form_id, has_options) that complement the component's existing functionality without any conflicts. The component's own computed properties and methods operate on different concerns, focusing on field settings and editing state management.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for form_field_mixin definition and its methods ast-grep --pattern 'const form_field_mixin = { $$$ }' # Search for any potential method conflicts rg -A 2 "methods: {" admin/form-builder/assets/js/componentsLength of output: 204
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for form_field_mixin definition rg "form_field_mixin\s*=" admin/form-builder/assets/js/ # Search for method definitions in field-options component rg "methods:\s*{" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/ -A 5 # Search for wpuf_mixins object definition rg "wpuf_mixins\s*=" admin/form-builder/assets/js/Length of output: 361
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get the content of form-field mixin cat admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.js # Search for methods in field-options component with fixed regex rg "methods: {" admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/index.js -A 10 # Search for field_options mixin definition rg "field_options" admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/ -A 5Length of output: 2961
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Try different approach to get methods from field-options component cat admin/form-builder/assets/js/components/field-options/index.js # Search for field_options mixin with different pattern cat admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/field-options.jsLength of output: 3874
includes/Fields/Form_Field_Post_Title.php (2)
97-97: LGTM: Adding required to default optionsAdding 'required' to the default options settings is appropriate as post titles are essential for content management.
113-113: Verify impact of making post title requiredSetting
required => 'yes'enforces post title as mandatory. While this makes sense for content management, we should verify the impact on existing forms.✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response:
Making post title required is safe and aligned with existing implementation
The codebase search reveals that:
- Post title is already set as required in the default form template (wpuf-functions.php:
'required' => 'yes')- All form templates (WooCommerce, Events Calendar, Post) consistently implement post title as required
- No existing forms have
required => nofor post title (confirmed by empty results from the search)- The field is a core WordPress requirement for content management
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for existing forms that might be affected rg -l "post_title.*required.*no" --type php # Check for any custom handling of post title validation ast-grep --pattern 'function validate_post_title($$$)'Length of output: 102
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's search for any usage of post_title field in forms or configurations rg -A 3 "post_title" --type php # Also check for any form validation or processing related to post titles rg -A 3 "validate.*post.*title" --type php -i # Look for any form field configurations ast-grep --pattern 'class Form_Field_Post_Title { $$$ }'Length of output: 44742
includes/Fields/Form_Field_Cloudflare_Turnstile.php (1)
41-48: LGTM! Improved HTML structure and accessibility.The changes enhance the field's structure by:
- Adding proper list item wrapping for consistency with other form fields
- Including dynamic attributes via
print_list_attributes()- Adding the
wpuf-fieldsclass for consistent stylingincludes/Fields/Form_Field_Featured_Image.php (1)
113-113: LGTM! Verify impact on existing forms.The exclusion of the 'width' option from default settings is logical for featured images, as their dimensions are typically managed by the theme.
Let's verify that this change doesn't affect existing forms:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response. The results show that in all template implementations (WooCommerce, Post, and Events Calendar), the featured image field is configured without any width settings. The templates only use basic configurations like 'count', 'required', 'label', 'max_size', etc. This confirms that the width parameter is not being used in any existing forms or templates.
Verified: Width parameter exclusion is safe
The removal of the 'width' option from default settings is safe as none of the existing form templates or implementations utilize width configurations for featured images. This change aligns with the typical behavior where featured image dimensions are managed by the theme.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any form configurations that might be using width settings for featured images rg -l "featured_image.*width" --type phpLength of output: 42
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a broader search to find featured image field usage patterns rg -l "featured_image" --type php # Also search for any width-related configurations in form fields rg "width.*featured" --type php -B2 -A2 # Check the parent class or interface for any width-related configurations fd "Field.php" --type f --exec rg -l "width" {}Length of output: 797
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the actual implementation and usage of featured image field in templates rg -A 5 "featured_image" includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/*.php # Check if there are any existing form configurations with featured image settings rg -A 5 "featured_image" "includes/Fields/Form_Field_Featured_Image.php" # Look for any width-related configurations in the field manager rg "width" includes/class-field-manager.php -A 3Length of output: 5728
includes/Fields/Form_Field_Textarea.php (1)
79-79: Verify the builder_class_names mixin function.The code uses a Vue.js mixin function that needs to be verified for proper initialization and error handling.
✅ Verification successful
The builder_class_names mixin function is properly implemented and safe to use.
The function is a well-structured utility that:
- Takes a type_class parameter to determine which CSS classes to apply
- Has proper switch-case handling for different field types
- Returns a consistent array of classes including field type, required status, and unique identifier
- Uses defensive coding with proper variable initialization
- Has no error-prone operations that would require explicit error handling
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the builder_class_names mixin function implementation # Search for the mixin definition ast-grep --pattern 'builder_class_names: function($_) { $$$ }' # Search for any error handling related to the mixin rg -A 5 "builder_class_names.*error"Length of output: 105
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try different approaches to locate the mixin # Search for builder_class_names in JavaScript/Vue files rg -t js -t vue "builder_class_names" -B 2 -A 5 # Search for mixins that might contain this function rg -t js -t vue "mixins.*builder" -B 2 -A 5 # Look for Vue component definitions that might use this ast-grep --pattern 'Vue.component($_, { $$$ mixins: $_, $$$ })' # Search for any file containing builder_class_names fd -t f -E node_modules -E vendor | xargs grep -l "builder_class_names"Length of output: 74083
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a different approach to locate the mixin # Search for builder_class_names in all files rg "builder_class_names" -B 2 -A 2 # Search for mixins definition files fd -t f -E node_modules -E vendor "mixins?.js$" # Look for Vue mixins that might contain this function ast-grep --pattern 'mixins: { $$$ builder_class_names: $_, $$$ }'Length of output: 22456
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the implementation of builder_class_names in the mixins file # Display the builder_class_names function implementation rg -A 10 "builder_class_names: function" assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.js # Also check the implementation in the form-field mixin rg -A 10 "builder_class_names: function" admin/form-builder/assets/js/mixins/form-field.jsLength of output: 865
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's see the complete implementation of the builder_class_names function # Display more context of the function implementation rg -A 30 "builder_class_names: function" assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.js # Also check if there are any error handling related code rg "commonClasses.*error" assets/js/wpuf-form-builder-mixins.jsLength of output: 1502
includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Form_Template.php (1)
19-19: Verify the impact of commenting out the action hook.The
admin_footeraction hook for rendering post form templates has been commented out. This could affect the form template rendering functionality.✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about where this template rendering might be handled now.
Let me check one more thing to see if this template rendering is moved to a different hook or if it's being handled differently in newer versions.
The commented action hook is part of version-specific changes and is handled correctly
The code shows that the template rendering functionality is part of a broader version-specific change where different templates and styles are loaded based on the WPUF Pro version (before/after 4.1). The commented-out action hook is intentional as the template rendering is now handled through a different mechanism in newer versions, as evidenced by the version-specific modal template loading:
if ( defined( 'WPUF_PRO_VERSION' ) && version_compare( WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<' ) ) { $modal = WPUF_ROOT . '/includes/Admin/template-parts/modal.php'; } else { $modal = WPUF_ROOT . '/includes/Admin/template-parts/modal-v4.1.php'; }🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if the template rendering is handled elsewhere rg -A 5 "render_post_form_templates" --type phpLength of output: 1106
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for other potential places where this template rendering is hooked or called rg -A 5 "admin_footer.*template" --type php # Check the should_display method to understand the conditions ast-grep --pattern 'function should_display() { $$$ }' # Check if there are any other template rendering hooks in the same class ast-grep --pattern 'class Form_Template { $$$ }'Length of output: 706
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for any modal or template rendering in the file rg -B 5 -A 10 "modal" includes/Admin/Forms/Post/Templates/Form_Template.php # Check if there are any version-specific changes around template rendering rg "WPUF_PRO_VERSION" --type php -B 2 -A 2Length of output: 4383
includes/Admin/Menu.php (1)
119-134: LGTM with a path verification suggestion.The implementation properly handles templates and includes proper error handling with early breaks.
Let's verify the template file existence and permissions:
✅ Verification successful
Template file verification successful
The template file
modal-v4.1.phpexists at the expected pathincludes/Admin/template-parts/and has proper read permissions, confirming that the file inclusion in the code is valid and secure.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify template file existence and permissions # Check if the template file exists and is readable fd -t f "modal-v4.1.php" -x sh -c ' if [ -r "{}" ]; then echo "Template file {} exists and is readable" else echo "Warning: Template file {} is not accessible" fi 'Length of output: 262
includes/Assets.php (1)
109-179: LGTM with asset verification suggestion.The style registrations are well-organized with consistent formatting and proper versioning.
Let's verify the existence of the new admin form builder CSS file:
✅ Verification successful
The admin form builder CSS file exists in multiple locations
The file
form-builder.cssexists in both the expected locations:
assets/css/admin/form-builder.css(matches the registered pathWPUF_ASSET_URI . '/css/admin/form-builder.css')assets/css/wpuf-form-builder.css(matches the registered pathWPUF_ASSET_URI . '/css/wpuf-form-builder.css')The style registrations in the code are correctly referencing existing CSS files in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify existence of the new admin form builder CSS file # Check if the CSS file exists and is readable fd -t f "form-builder.css" -p "css/admin" -x sh -c ' if [ -r "{}" ]; then echo "Admin form builder CSS file {} exists and is readable" else echo "Warning: Admin form builder CSS file {} is not accessible" fi 'Length of output: 318
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a broader search for the form-builder CSS file fd -t f "form-builder.css" -x sh -c ' echo "Found: {}" echo "Path relative to repo root: {//}" ' # Also search in assets directory which is common for WordPress plugins fd -t f "form-builder.css" -p "assets" -x sh -c ' echo "Found in assets: {}" 'Length of output: 537
includes/Admin/Forms/Admin_Form.php (3)
199-219: LGTM: Well-structured tab content implementation with Vue.jsThe implementation correctly uses Vue.js v-show directives to handle tab content visibility, with proper ID matching and secure file inclusion.
237-254: LGTM: Well-implemented tab navigation with Vue.jsThe tab navigation implementation demonstrates good practices:
- Consistent use of Vue.js class bindings for active state
- Proper internationalization with translation functions
- Clean and consistent HTML structure
290-292: LGTM: Clean notification tab content implementationThe notification tab content implementation is consistent with other tabs and properly uses Vue.js directives.
includes/Admin/Forms/Template_Post.php (1)
44-48: LGTM: Clean checkbox input enhancementThe addition of the
wpuf-input-checkboxclass improves styling consistency while maintaining proper security practices with escaping.includes/Admin/Posting.php (2)
25-25: LGTM: Proper action hook registrationThe action hook is correctly registered for asset management.
63-68: LGTM: Clean version-based style enqueuingThe implementation correctly handles different versions for form builder style enqueuing.
| @@ -1,10 +1,10 @@ | |||
| <div class="wpuf-fields"> | |||
| <input | |||
| type="url" | |||
| :class="class_names('url')" | |||
| :class="builder_class_names('url')" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Migration to builder_class_names is incomplete
The codebase shows inconsistent usage of class naming utilities:
- Several components still use the old
class_namesmethod:- form-radio_field/template.php:
class_names('radio_btns') - form-post_title/template.php:
class_names('textfield') - form-multiple_select/template.php:
class_names('multi_label') - form-dropdown_field/template.php:
class_names('select_lbl') - form-checkbox_field/template.php:
class_names('checkbox_btns')
- form-radio_field/template.php:
The migration to builder_class_names appears to be in progress but not fully completed. This inconsistency could lead to styling issues or maintenance problems.
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the builder_class_names utility
The change from class_names to builder_class_names appears to be part of a form builder specific refactoring.
Let's verify this utility is consistently used across other form components:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for both old and new class binding methods to ensure consistent migration
echo "Checking for old class_names usage:"
rg "class_names\(" "admin/form-builder"
echo -e "\nChecking for new builder_class_names usage:"
rg "builder_class_names\(" "admin/form-builder"
Length of output: 6563
| <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5"> | ||
| <path d="M8.75 3.75a.75.75 0 0 0-1.5 0v3.5h-3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0 1.5h3.5v3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 1.5 0v-3.5h3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0-1.5h-3.5v-3.5Z" /> | ||
| </svg> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Refactor duplicate SVG code.
The SVG icon is duplicated in both conditional branches. Consider extracting it into a reusable template.
Create a new template for the icon:
+<template #icon>
+ <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5" role="img" aria-hidden="true">
+ <path d="M8.75 3.75a.75.75 0 0 0-1.5 0v3.5h-3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0 1.5h3.5v3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 1.5 0v-3.5h3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0-1.5h-3.5v-3.5Z" />
+ </svg>
+</template>
-<template v-if="field.button_label === ''">
- <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5">
- <path d="M8.75 3.75a.75.75 0 0 0-1.5 0v3.5h-3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0 1.5h3.5v3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 1.5 0v-3.5h3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0-1.5h-3.5v-3.5Z" />
- </svg>
+<template v-if="field.button_label === ''">
+ <slot name="icon"></slot>
<?php _e( 'Select Image', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?>
</template>
<template v-else>
- <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16" fill="currentColor" class="wpuf-size-5">
- <path d="M8.75 3.75a.75.75 0 0 0-1.5 0v3.5h-3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0 1.5h3.5v3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 1.5 0v-3.5h3.5a.75.75 0 0 0 0-1.5h-3.5v-3.5Z" />
- </svg>
+ <slot name="icon"></slot>
{{ field.button_label }}
</template>Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| autocomplete="off" | ||
| > | ||
| <span v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-help" v-html="field.help" /> | ||
| <p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-html="field.help"></p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve help text security while maintaining enhanced styling.
The semantic HTML and utility classes are good improvements, but using v-html for help text could pose XSS risks. Consider using v-text or interpolation ({{ }}) if the help text doesn't require HTML rendering.
- <p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-html="field.help"></p>
+ <p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-text="field.help"></p>📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| <p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-html="field.help"></p> | |
| <p v-if="field.help" class="wpuf-mt-2 wpuf-text-sm wpuf-text-gray-500" v-text="field.help"></p> |
| if ( this.is_post_form ) { | ||
| // secondary settings tabs and their contents | ||
| var settings_tabs = $( '#wpuf-form-builder-settings-tabs .nav-tab' ); | ||
| var self = this; | ||
|
|
||
| // secondary settings tabs and their contents | ||
| var settings_tabs = $('#wpuf-form-builder-settings .nav-tab'), | ||
| settings_tab_contents = $('#wpuf-form-builder-settings .tab-contents .group'); | ||
| // add a click listener to each settings_tab | ||
| settings_tabs.each( function () { | ||
| $( this ).bind( 'click', self.setActiveSettingsTab ); | ||
| } ); | ||
|
|
||
| settings_tabs.first().addClass('nav-tab-active'); | ||
| settings_tab_contents.first().addClass('active'); | ||
| var clipboard = new window.Clipboard( '.form-id' ); | ||
| $( ".form-id" ).tooltip(); | ||
|
|
||
| this.bind_tab_on_click(settings_tabs, '#wpuf-form-builder-settings'); | ||
| clipboard.on( 'success', function ( e ) { | ||
| // Show copied tooltip | ||
| $( e.trigger ) | ||
| .attr( 'data-original-title', 'Shortcode copied!' ) | ||
| .tooltip( 'show' ); | ||
|
|
||
| var clipboard = new window.Clipboard('.form-id'); | ||
| $(".form-id").tooltip(); | ||
| self.shortcodeCopied = true; | ||
|
|
||
| var self = this; | ||
| // Reset the copied tooltip | ||
| setTimeout( function () { | ||
| $( e.trigger ).tooltip( 'hide' ) | ||
| .attr( 'data-original-title', self.i18n.copy_shortcode ); | ||
| self.shortcodeCopied = false; | ||
| }, 1000 ); | ||
|
|
||
| clipboard.on('success', function(e) { | ||
| // Show copied tooltip | ||
| $(e.trigger) | ||
| .attr('data-original-title', 'Copied!') | ||
| .tooltip('show'); | ||
| e.clearSelection(); | ||
| } ); | ||
|
|
||
| // Reset the copied tooltip | ||
| setTimeout(function() { | ||
| $(e.trigger).tooltip('hide') | ||
| .attr('data-original-title', self.i18n.copy_shortcode); | ||
| }, 1000); | ||
| window.onbeforeunload = function () { | ||
| if (self.isDirty) { | ||
| return self.i18n.unsaved_changes; | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
| } else { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid Redefining Variables (settings_tabs, clipboard, self)
The snippet re-declares local variables (like “settings_tabs,” “clipboard,” “self”) inside the block for “is_post_form.” This might conflict with earlier variable declarations. Consider unique variable names or block scoping.
- var settings_tabs = ...
- var clipboard = ...
- var self = this;
+ var post_form_settings_tabs = ...
+ var post_form_clipboard = ...
+ var vm = this;📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| if ( this.is_post_form ) { | |
| // secondary settings tabs and their contents | |
| var settings_tabs = $( '#wpuf-form-builder-settings-tabs .nav-tab' ); | |
| var self = this; | |
| // secondary settings tabs and their contents | |
| var settings_tabs = $('#wpuf-form-builder-settings .nav-tab'), | |
| settings_tab_contents = $('#wpuf-form-builder-settings .tab-contents .group'); | |
| // add a click listener to each settings_tab | |
| settings_tabs.each( function () { | |
| $( this ).bind( 'click', self.setActiveSettingsTab ); | |
| } ); | |
| settings_tabs.first().addClass('nav-tab-active'); | |
| settings_tab_contents.first().addClass('active'); | |
| var clipboard = new window.Clipboard( '.form-id' ); | |
| $( ".form-id" ).tooltip(); | |
| this.bind_tab_on_click(settings_tabs, '#wpuf-form-builder-settings'); | |
| clipboard.on( 'success', function ( e ) { | |
| // Show copied tooltip | |
| $( e.trigger ) | |
| .attr( 'data-original-title', 'Shortcode copied!' ) | |
| .tooltip( 'show' ); | |
| var clipboard = new window.Clipboard('.form-id'); | |
| $(".form-id").tooltip(); | |
| self.shortcodeCopied = true; | |
| var self = this; | |
| // Reset the copied tooltip | |
| setTimeout( function () { | |
| $( e.trigger ).tooltip( 'hide' ) | |
| .attr( 'data-original-title', self.i18n.copy_shortcode ); | |
| self.shortcodeCopied = false; | |
| }, 1000 ); | |
| clipboard.on('success', function(e) { | |
| // Show copied tooltip | |
| $(e.trigger) | |
| .attr('data-original-title', 'Copied!') | |
| .tooltip('show'); | |
| e.clearSelection(); | |
| } ); | |
| // Reset the copied tooltip | |
| setTimeout(function() { | |
| $(e.trigger).tooltip('hide') | |
| .attr('data-original-title', self.i18n.copy_shortcode); | |
| }, 1000); | |
| window.onbeforeunload = function () { | |
| if (self.isDirty) { | |
| return self.i18n.unsaved_changes; | |
| } | |
| }; | |
| } else { | |
| if ( this.is_post_form ) { | |
| // secondary settings tabs and their contents | |
| var post_form_settings_tabs = $( '#wpuf-form-builder-settings-tabs .nav-tab' ); | |
| var vm = this; | |
| // add a click listener to each settings_tab | |
| post_form_settings_tabs.each( function () { | |
| $( this ).bind( 'click', vm.setActiveSettingsTab ); | |
| } ); | |
| var post_form_clipboard = new window.Clipboard( '.form-id' ); | |
| $( ".form-id" ).tooltip(); | |
| post_form_clipboard.on( 'success', function ( e ) { | |
| // Show copied tooltip | |
| $( e.trigger ) | |
| .attr( 'data-original-title', 'Shortcode copied!' ) | |
| .tooltip( 'show' ); | |
| vm.shortcodeCopied = true; | |
| // Reset the copied tooltip | |
| setTimeout( function () { | |
| $( e.trigger ).tooltip( 'hide' ) | |
| .attr( 'data-original-title', vm.i18n.copy_shortcode ); | |
| vm.shortcodeCopied = false; | |
| }, 1000 ); | |
| e.clearSelection(); | |
| } ); | |
| window.onbeforeunload = function () { | |
| if (vm.isDirty) { | |
| return vm.i18n.unsaved_changes; | |
| } | |
| }; | |
| } else { |
| <div v-if="hidden_fields.length" class="wpuf-border-t wpuf-border-dashed wpuf-border-gray-300 wpuf-mt-2"> | ||
| <h4><?php esc_html_e( 'Hidden Fields', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?></h4> | ||
| <ul class="wpuf-form"> | ||
| <li | ||
| v-for="(field, index) in hidden_fields" | ||
| class="field-items wpuf-group hover:wpuf-bg-green-50 !wpuf-m-0 !wpuf-p-0" | ||
| > | ||
| <div | ||
| :class="parseInt(editing_form_id) === parseInt(field.id) ? 'wpuf-border wpuf-border-dashed wpuf-bg-green-50 wpuf-border-green-400' : 'wpuf-border-transparent'" | ||
| class="wpuf-flex wpuf-bg-gray-50 wpuf-p-4 wpuf-rounded-t-md wpuf-border-t wpuf-border-r wpuf-border-l group-hover:wpuf-border-dashed group-hover:wpuf-border-green-400 group-hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer"> | ||
| <strong><?php esc_html_e( 'key', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?></strong>: {{ field.name }} | | ||
| <strong><?php esc_html_e( 'value', 'wp-user-frontend' ); ?></strong>: {{ field.meta_value }} | ||
| </div> | ||
| <div | ||
| class="control-buttons wpuf-opacity-0 group-hover:wpuf-opacity-100 wpuf-rounded-b-lg !wpuf-bg-green-600 wpuf-flex wpuf-justify-around wpuf-items-center wpuf-transition wpuf-duration-150 wpuf-ease-out"> | ||
| <div class="wpuf-flex wpuf-items-center wpuf-text-green-200"> | ||
| <template v-if="!is_failed_to_validate(field.template)"> | ||
| <span | ||
| :class="action_button_classes" | ||
| @click="open_field_settings(field.id)"> | ||
| <i | ||
| class="fa fa-pencil"></i> | ||
| Edit | ||
| </span> | ||
| <span | ||
| :class="action_button_classes" | ||
| @click="clone_field(field.id, index)"> | ||
| <i | ||
| class="fa fa-clone"></i> | ||
| Copy | ||
| </span> | ||
| </template> | ||
| <template v-else> | ||
| <span :class="action_button_classes"> | ||
| <i class="fa fa-arrows control-button-disabled wpuf--ml-1 wpuf-rounded-l-md"></i> | ||
| </span> | ||
| <span :class="action_button_classes"> | ||
| <i class="fa fa-pencil control-button-disabled wpuf--ml-1"></i> | ||
| Edit | ||
| </span> | ||
| <span :class="action_button_classes"> | ||
| <i | ||
| class="fa fa-clone control-button-disabled wpuf--ml-1"></i> | ||
| Copy | ||
| </span> | ||
| </template> | ||
| <span :class="action_button_classes" @click="delete_field(index)"> | ||
| <i | ||
| class="fa fa-trash-o wpuf--ml-1"></i> | ||
| Remove | ||
| </span> | ||
| <span | ||
| v-if="is_pro_feature(field.template)" | ||
| :class="action_button_classes" class="hover:wpuf-bg-green-700"> | ||
| <a | ||
| :href="pro_link" | ||
| target="_blank" | ||
| class="wpuf-rounded-r-md hover:wpuf-bg-slate-500 hover:wpuf-cursor-pointer wpuf-transition wpuf-duration-150 wpuf-ease-out hover:wpuf-transition-all"> | ||
| <svg | ||
| width="15" height="15" viewBox="0 0 20 15" fill="none" | ||
| xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"> | ||
| <path | ||
| d="M19.2131 4.11564C19.2161 4.16916 19.2121 4.22364 19.1983 4.27775L17.9646 10.5323C17.9024 10.7741 17.6796 10.9441 17.4235 10.9455L10.0216 10.9818H10.0188H2.61682C2.35933 10.9818 2.13495 10.8112 2.07275 10.5681L0.839103 4.29542C0.824897 4.23985 0.820785 4.18385 0.824374 4.12895C0.34714 3.98269 0 3.54829 0 3.03636C0 2.40473 0.528224 1.89091 1.17757 1.89091C1.82692 1.89091 2.35514 2.40473 2.35514 3.03636C2.35514 3.39207 2.18759 3.71033 1.92523 3.92058L3.46976 5.43433C3.86011 5.81695 4.40179 6.03629 4.95596 6.03629C5.61122 6.03629 6.23596 5.7336 6.62938 5.22647L9.1677 1.95491C8.95447 1.74764 8.82243 1.46124 8.82243 1.14545C8.82243 0.513818 9.35065 0 10 0C10.6493 0 11.1776 0.513818 11.1776 1.14545C11.1776 1.45178 11.0526 1.72982 10.8505 1.93556L10.8526 1.93811L13.3726 5.21869C13.7658 5.73069 14.3928 6.03636 15.0499 6.03636C15.6092 6.03636 16.1351 5.82451 16.5305 5.43978L18.0848 3.92793C17.8169 3.71775 17.6449 3.39644 17.6449 3.03636C17.6449 2.40473 18.1731 1.89091 18.8224 1.89091C19.4718 1.89091 20 2.40473 20 3.03636C20 3.53462 19.6707 3.9584 19.2131 4.11564ZM17.8443 12.6909C17.8443 12.3897 17.5932 12.1455 17.2835 12.1455H2.77884C2.46916 12.1455 2.21809 12.3897 2.21809 12.6909V14C2.21809 14.3012 2.46916 14.5455 2.77884 14.5455H17.2835C17.5932 14.5455 17.8443 14.3012 17.8443 14V12.6909Z" | ||
| fill="#FB9A28"/> | ||
| </svg> | ||
| </a> | ||
| </span> | ||
| </div> | ||
| </div> | ||
| </li> | ||
| </ul> | ||
| </div> | ||
| <?php do_action( 'wpuf_form_builder_template_builder_stage_bottom_area' ); ?> | ||
| </div> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Alert on large template complexity.
This hidden field listing block is quite verbose. Consider splitting large Vue structures into smaller sub-components for readability and maintainability. A dedicated “WPUFHiddenField” component might better isolate the logic.
| if ( file_exists( $crown_icon ) ) { | ||
| printf( '<span class="pro-icon-title wpuf-ml-2"> %s</span>', file_get_contents( $crown_icon ) ); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Security: Avoid direct file_get_contents for SVG.
Using file_get_contents directly on SVG files could pose a security risk. Consider using WordPress's built-in SVG handling or sanitizing the SVG content.
-if (file_exists($crown_icon)) {
- printf('<span class="pro-icon-title wpuf-ml-2"> %s</span>', file_get_contents($crown_icon));
-}
+if (file_exists($crown_icon)) {
+ $svg_content = file_get_contents($crown_icon);
+ $safe_svg = wp_kses(
+ $svg_content,
+ array(
+ 'svg' => array('class' => true, 'viewbox' => true),
+ 'path' => array('d' => true)
+ )
+ );
+ printf('<span class="pro-icon-title wpuf-ml-2"> %s</span>', $safe_svg);
+}Also applies to: 113-115
| <script type="text/javascript"> | ||
| ( function ( $ ) { | ||
| var popup = { | ||
| init: function () { | ||
| $( '.wrap' ).on( 'click', 'a.page-title-action.add-form', this.openModal ); | ||
| $( '.wpuf-form-template-modal .wpuf-close-btn' ).on( 'click', $.proxy( this.closeModal, this ) ); | ||
|
|
||
| $( 'body' ).on( 'keydown', $.proxy( this.onEscapeKey, this ) ); | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| openModal: function ( e ) { | ||
| e.preventDefault(); | ||
|
|
||
| $( '.wpuf-form-template-modal' ).show(); | ||
| $( '#wpbody-content .wrap' ).hide(); | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| onEscapeKey: function ( e ) { | ||
| if (27 === e.keyCode) { | ||
| this.closeModal( e ); | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| closeModal: function ( e ) { | ||
| if (typeof e !== 'undefined') { | ||
| e.preventDefault(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| $( '.wpuf-form-template-modal' ).hide(); | ||
| $( '#wpbody-content .wrap' ).show(); | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| $( function () { | ||
| popup.init(); | ||
| } ); | ||
|
|
||
| } )( jQuery ); | ||
| </script> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider moving JavaScript to a separate file.
The JavaScript code should be moved to a separate file and enqueued properly using WordPress's wp_enqueue_script() for better maintainability and caching.
| grunt.registerTask('tailwind', function() { | ||
| const done = this.async(); | ||
|
|
||
| // Process each file mapping | ||
| Object.entries(tailwindFileMap).forEach(([phpFile, cssFile]) => { | ||
| const inputFile = `src/css/${cssFile}`; | ||
| const outputFile = `assets/css/${cssFile}`; | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure the input file exists | ||
| if (grunt.file.exists(inputFile)) { | ||
| // Run the tailwind command | ||
| grunt.task.run(`shell:tailwind:${inputFile}:${outputFile}`); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| done(); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add error handling for Tailwind processing.
The Tailwind task should include error handling and logging for better debugging capabilities.
grunt.registerTask('tailwind', function() {
const done = this.async();
+ let hasErrors = false;
Object.entries(tailwindFileMap).forEach(([phpFile, cssFile]) => {
const inputFile = `src/css/${cssFile}`;
const outputFile = `assets/css/${cssFile}`;
if (grunt.file.exists(inputFile)) {
grunt.task.run(`shell:tailwind:${inputFile}:${outputFile}`);
+ } else {
+ grunt.log.error(`Input file ${inputFile} not found`);
+ hasErrors = true;
}
});
+ if (hasErrors) {
+ return false;
+ }
done();
});📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| grunt.registerTask('tailwind', function() { | |
| const done = this.async(); | |
| // Process each file mapping | |
| Object.entries(tailwindFileMap).forEach(([phpFile, cssFile]) => { | |
| const inputFile = `src/css/${cssFile}`; | |
| const outputFile = `assets/css/${cssFile}`; | |
| // Ensure the input file exists | |
| if (grunt.file.exists(inputFile)) { | |
| // Run the tailwind command | |
| grunt.task.run(`shell:tailwind:${inputFile}:${outputFile}`); | |
| } | |
| }); | |
| done(); | |
| }); | |
| grunt.registerTask('tailwind', function() { | |
| const done = this.async(); | |
| let hasErrors = false; | |
| // Process each file mapping | |
| Object.entries(tailwindFileMap).forEach(([phpFile, cssFile]) => { | |
| const inputFile = `src/css/${cssFile}`; | |
| const outputFile = `assets/css/${cssFile}`; | |
| // Ensure the input file exists | |
| if (grunt.file.exists(inputFile)) { | |
| // Run the tailwind command | |
| grunt.task.run(`shell:tailwind:${inputFile}:${outputFile}`); | |
| } else { | |
| grunt.log.error(`Input file ${inputFile} not found`); | |
| hasErrors = true; | |
| } | |
| }); | |
| if (hasErrors) { | |
| return false; | |
| } | |
| done(); | |
| }); |
| <a | ||
| href="#wpuf-form-builder-notification" | ||
| @click="active_tab = 'notification'" | ||
| :class="active_tab === 'notification' ? 'wpuf-bg-white wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-rounded-md wpuf-drop-shadow-sm' : ''" | ||
| class="wpuf-nav-tab wpuf-nav-tab-active wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-py-2 wpuf-px-4 wpuf-text-sm hover:wpuf-bg-white hover:wpuf-text-gray-800 hover:wpuf-rounded-md hover:wpuf-drop-shadow-sm focus:wpuf-shadow-none wpuf-mr-2"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Fix redundant active class in notification tab
The notification tab has wpuf-nav-tab-active class hardcoded, which conflicts with the dynamic class binding.
- class="wpuf-nav-tab wpuf-nav-tab-active wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-py-2 wpuf-px-4 wpuf-text-sm hover:wpuf-bg-white hover:wpuf-text-gray-800 hover:wpuf-rounded-md hover:wpuf-drop-shadow-sm focus:wpuf-shadow-none wpuf-mr-2">
+ class="wpuf-nav-tab wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-py-2 wpuf-px-4 wpuf-text-sm hover:wpuf-bg-white hover:wpuf-text-gray-800 hover:wpuf-rounded-md hover:wpuf-drop-shadow-sm focus:wpuf-shadow-none wpuf-mr-2">📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| <a | |
| href="#wpuf-form-builder-notification" | |
| @click="active_tab = 'notification'" | |
| :class="active_tab === 'notification' ? 'wpuf-bg-white wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-rounded-md wpuf-drop-shadow-sm' : ''" | |
| class="wpuf-nav-tab wpuf-nav-tab-active wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-py-2 wpuf-px-4 wpuf-text-sm hover:wpuf-bg-white hover:wpuf-text-gray-800 hover:wpuf-rounded-md hover:wpuf-drop-shadow-sm focus:wpuf-shadow-none wpuf-mr-2"> | |
| <a | |
| href="#wpuf-form-builder-notification" | |
| @click="active_tab = 'notification'" | |
| :class="active_tab === 'notification' ? 'wpuf-bg-white wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-rounded-md wpuf-drop-shadow-sm' : ''" | |
| class="wpuf-nav-tab wpuf-text-gray-800 wpuf-py-2 wpuf-px-4 wpuf-text-sm hover:wpuf-bg-white hover:wpuf-text-gray-800 hover:wpuf-rounded-md hover:wpuf-drop-shadow-sm focus:wpuf-shadow-none wpuf-mr-2"> |
| /** | ||
| * Dequeue assets to avoid conflict | ||
| * | ||
| * @since WPUF_SINCE | ||
| * | ||
| * @return void | ||
| */ | ||
| public function dequeue_assets() { | ||
| $post_form_page = 'wpuf-post-forms'; | ||
|
|
||
| if ( strpos( get_current_screen()->id, $post_form_page ) === false ) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder' ); | ||
| if ( defined( 'WPUF_PRO_VERSION' ) && version_compare( WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<' ) ) { | ||
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder-pro' ); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Define WPUF_SINCE constant
The @since WPUF_SINCE docblock uses an undefined constant. This should be replaced with the actual version number.
- * @since WPUF_SINCE
+ * @since 4.0.0📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| /** | |
| * Dequeue assets to avoid conflict | |
| * | |
| * @since WPUF_SINCE | |
| * | |
| * @return void | |
| */ | |
| public function dequeue_assets() { | |
| $post_form_page = 'wpuf-post-forms'; | |
| if ( strpos( get_current_screen()->id, $post_form_page ) === false ) { | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder' ); | |
| if ( defined( 'WPUF_PRO_VERSION' ) && version_compare( WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<' ) ) { | |
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder-pro' ); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| /** | |
| * Dequeue assets to avoid conflict | |
| * | |
| * @since 4.0.0 | |
| * | |
| * @return void | |
| */ | |
| public function dequeue_assets() { | |
| $post_form_page = 'wpuf-post-forms'; | |
| if ( strpos( get_current_screen()->id, $post_form_page ) === false ) { | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder' ); | |
| if ( defined( 'WPUF_PRO_VERSION' ) && version_compare( WPUF_PRO_VERSION, '4.1', '<' ) ) { | |
| wp_dequeue_style( 'wpuf-form-builder-pro' ); | |
| } | |
| } |
fixes #640, fixes 657
Add Fields, Field Optionspart for form builder UI enhancement. Image below for better understanding:Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Improvements
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores