[Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function #20781

Padam87 · 2016-12-06T13:46:28Z

Q	A
Branch?	3.2
Bug fix?	no
New feature?	yes
BC breaks?	no
Deprecations?	no
Tests pass?	yes
Fixed tickets	-
License	MIT
Doc PR	-

Use case: I needed to create a wizard like visualization for the status, I think this is common enough to be useful for others too.

stof · 2016-12-06T13:49:32Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Extension/WorkflowExtension.php

+     * @param array        $places
+     * @param Transition[] $transitions
+     */
+    protected function recursiveBacktraceTransitions(&$finished, $places, $transitions)


should not be protected

stof · 2016-12-06T13:49:51Z

this is clearly lacking tests.

Padam87 · 2016-12-06T13:56:06Z

I know, I will add tests if you think it is okay to have this in the codebase :)

Padam87 · 2016-12-06T17:02:50Z

Are the tests failing because of a fluke ? :S

lyrixx · 2016-12-06T17:19:05Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Extension/WorkflowExtension.php

+        $workflow = $this->workflowRegistry->get($object, $name);
+        $marking = $workflow->getMarking($object);
+
+        return array_key_exists($state, $marking->getPlaces());


return $marking->has($state);

lyrixx · 2016-12-06T17:20:37Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Extension/WorkflowExtension.php

+        return array_key_exists($state, $marking->getPlaces());
+    }
+
+    public function isComplete($object, $state, $name = null)


What is the use case for this function?

You cannot determine if a state is completed just because of the active states, this function tracks back and checks.

Use case: http://bootsnipp.com/snippets/featured/form-process-steps

lyrixx · 2016-12-13T15:54:04Z

Hello @Padam87

I'm totally ok for the new twig method workflow_state_active, but please called it workflow_has_place.

I really tried to understand what is the workflow_state_complete, but I failed to. It looks like you think that when you fire the transition from A to B, the marking contains A and B. But actually, the marking contains only B. If I'm wrong, could you give me an example (not the previous screenshot, it did not helped me).

Finally, As I'm ok for the first one, you could split this PR into 2 PR to get it merged faster.

Padam87 · 2016-12-13T17:39:16Z

I think I will remove workflow_state_complete, because of the difficulties about its usage.

My goal was this: Let's say we have 4 places, A -> B ->C -> D, and we are currently in C.
If we want to render a process steps element in html, we would need to know if A and B are complete (to add an active css class to the element for example). Since the marking store only contains C, it is necessary to track back and get all the places that lead to C. This would of course only work for linear workflows...

stof · 2016-12-13T17:44:59Z

This looks like very specific to your use case. And the name is not even good, as what you are actually doing is trying to identify the previous states.
So I'm against adding this in core (especially given that it works only for some workflows). Add this in your own project if you need it.

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T10:37:14Z

Hello @Padam87

Could you take time to finish this one? If you can't and if you agree, I can push directly into your fork to finish it. Just tell me ;)

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T10:37:43Z

Oups. Sorry. I did not see you updated the PR.

lyrixx

👍

(failures are not related)

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T10:48:02Z

I have one question: Should it be a test ? ie something like:

{% if (subject is workflow_place 'place name') %}
    yes
{% endif %}

stof · 2016-12-19T11:03:18Z

yes it should be a test, except that the syntax will be this one:

{% if subject is workflow_place('place name') %}
    yes
{% endif %}

stof · 2016-12-19T11:04:36Z

though I'm not sure about the naming here. The subject is not the place itself.

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T12:31:57Z

oups, I forgot the has =>

{% if subject is workflow_has_place('place name') %}
    yes
{% endif %}

stof · 2016-12-19T14:41:28Z

@lyrixx when writing the name for a test, you should avoid using a verb in it, as is ..._has_.. is quite weird.
what about subject is in_workflow_place('place name') ?

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T14:46:36Z

@stof: I agree with you it's weird. but in_workflow_place does not follow the same pattern of others workflow functions. Other functions start with workflow. What about workflow_in_place

stof · 2016-12-19T14:51:19Z

@lyrixx the issue is that reading the source code is confusing then, as the workflow is not in the place; the subject is.
The main requirement for the Twig function/filter is to avoid name clashes with other extensions, which is why I also kept workflow in the name. And while I agree that keeping the differentiator at the beginning is more likely to avoid clashes (if everyone does it, a clash can only happen when reusing the same prefix), it looks really weird here. And I doubt in_ will be used as an extension prefix for something talking about workflow place again internally.

lyrixx · 2016-12-19T14:53:02Z

Fair enough. Actually, I have not strong preference here. So I will be ok with almost anything ;)

javiereguiluz · 2016-12-19T15:10:10Z

Trying to find a good name for this is very challenging. Would it make any sense to call it workflow_has_marked() or workflow_is_marked() ?

{% if workflow_has_marked(subject, 'place name') %}
    ...
{% endif %}

{% if workflow_is_marked(subject, 'place name') %}
    ...
{% endif %}

xabbuh · 2016-12-22T17:22:07Z

@javiereguiluz Your suggestions look weird when being used as tests as there will be two is then. So far, in_workflow_place sounds like the best suggestion to me.

javiereguiluz · 2016-12-22T17:32:09Z

@xabbuh shouldn't be workflow_in_place() ? In any case, why do you want to use it as a test. Can't you make the function accept two arguments?

{# weird #}
{% if subject is workflow_in_place('aaa') %}

{# ok? #}
{% if workflow_in_place(subject, 'aaa') %}

xabbuh · 2016-12-22T17:39:44Z

Why do you want to use a function for this? What you are actually doing here is testing for a condition.

javiereguiluz · 2016-12-22T17:47:27Z

To be honest, I'm not sure. I just consider better to use a function because it makes Twig code easier to understand. Besides, all the current functions are called workflow_* so it's mandatory to keep using that to make things easier to learn.

fabpot · 2016-12-22T18:24:55Z

I would also use a function here for consistency and because findingva good name for a test sounds difficul.

…

On 22 Dec 2016, at 18:47, Javier Eguiluz ***@***.***> wrote: To be honest, I'm not sure. I just consider better to use a function because it makes Twig code easier to understand. Besides, all the current functions are called workflow_* so it's mandatory to keep using that to make things easier to learn. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

lyrixx · 2016-12-26T18:37:44Z

👍

lyrixx · 2016-12-26T18:40:07Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Extension/WorkflowExtension.php

@@ -45,6 +46,14 @@ public function getEnabledTransitions($object, $name = null)
        return $this->workflowRegistry->get($object, $name)->getEnabledTransitions($object);
    }

+    public function hasPlace($object, $state, $name = null)


BTW, it's weird to call the variable state when the twig function, php method call it place.
Could you update it please?

lyrixx · 2016-12-26T18:41:11Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Extension/WorkflowExtension.php

+        $workflow = $this->workflowRegistry->get($object, $name);
+        $marking = $workflow->getMarking($object);
+
+        return $marking->has($state);


All others implementations fit on one line.

return $this->workflowRegistry->get($object, $name)->getMarking()->has($state);

lyrixx · 2016-12-26T18:41:52Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Tests/Extension/WorkflowExtensionTest.php

+    {
+        $subject = new \stdClass();
+
+        $marking = new Marking(array('ordered' => true, 'waiting_for_payment' => true));


I should be 1 and not true

lyrixx · 2016-12-26T18:44:17Z

src/Symfony/Bridge/Twig/Tests/Extension/WorkflowExtensionTest.php

+
+        $marking = new Marking(array('ordered' => true, 'waiting_for_payment' => true));
+
+        $workflow = $this->getMock(Workflow::class, array(), array(), '', false);


in a previous PR, fab change all occurrences of getMock to use getMockBuiler...

Anyway, I would use concrete implementation instead of mock.
I will be simpler.

lyrixx · 2017-01-12T17:54:16Z

Closing in favor of #20781

…unction (Padam87, lyrixx) This PR was merged into the 3.3-dev branch. Discussion ---------- [TwigBridge][Worklow] Added a new workflow_has_place function | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | master | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | yes | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | #20781 | License | MIT | Doc PR | --- This PR follow up #20781 I also increased the Coverage of the WorkflowExtension and finally I added an extra commit that is not related to clean-up 2 unused properties Commits ------- 108c89d [TwigBridge] Removed unused class property 77f820e [TwigBridge][Workflow] Added more tests on WorkflowExtension efe500d [TwigBridge][Workflow] Fixed code and tests 4d0cc68 [TwigBridge][Workflow] Added workflow_has_place twig function

carsonbot added Status: Needs Review Workflow Feature labels Dec 6, 2016

stof reviewed Dec 6, 2016

View reviewed changes

Padam87 force-pushed the workflow-twig branch 2 times, most recently from de5afa0 to f85b378 Compare December 6, 2016 16:04

lyrixx requested changes Dec 6, 2016

View reviewed changes

Padam87 force-pushed the workflow-twig branch from f85b378 to 6708342 Compare December 6, 2016 18:00

nicolas-grekas modified the milestone: 3.x Dec 7, 2016

Padam87 force-pushed the workflow-twig branch from 6708342 to 6bfb447 Compare December 13, 2016 18:09

[Workflow][Twig] Added workflow_has_place twig function

81592c8

Padam87 force-pushed the workflow-twig branch from 6bfb447 to 81592c8 Compare December 13, 2016 18:10

lyrixx changed the title ~~[Workflow][Twig] Active and complete state checks~~ [Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx approved these changes Dec 19, 2016

View reviewed changes

lyrixx requested changes Dec 26, 2016

View reviewed changes

lyrixx mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2017

[TwigBridge][Worklow] Added a new workflow_has_place function #21253

Merged

lyrixx closed this Jan 12, 2017

nicolas-grekas modified the milestones: 3.x, 3.3 Mar 24, 2017

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function #20781

[Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function #20781

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

stof Dec 6, 2016

stof commented Dec 6, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

lyrixx Dec 6, 2016

lyrixx Dec 6, 2016

Padam87 Dec 6, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 13, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 13, 2016 •

edited

Loading

stof commented Dec 13, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx left a comment

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 19, 2016

xabbuh commented Dec 22, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 22, 2016

xabbuh commented Dec 22, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 22, 2016

fabpot commented Dec 22, 2016 via email

lyrixx commented Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx Dec 26, 2016

lyrixx commented Jan 12, 2017


		$marking = new Marking(array('ordered' => true, 'waiting_for_payment' => true));

		$workflow = $this->getMock(Workflow::class, array(), array(), '', false);

[Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function #20781

[Workflow][Twig] add workflow_has_state function #20781

Conversation

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

stof commented Dec 6, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 6, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lyrixx commented Dec 13, 2016

Padam87 commented Dec 13, 2016 • edited Loading

stof commented Dec 13, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

stof commented Dec 19, 2016

lyrixx commented Dec 19, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 19, 2016

xabbuh commented Dec 22, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 22, 2016

xabbuh commented Dec 22, 2016

javiereguiluz commented Dec 22, 2016

fabpot commented Dec 22, 2016 via email

lyrixx commented Dec 26, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lyrixx commented Jan 12, 2017

Padam87 commented Dec 13, 2016 •

edited

Loading