Skip to content

gw-conditional-logic-operator-does-not-contain.php: Fixed rule value for does not contain rule. #1094

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 8, 2025

Conversation

saifsultanc
Copy link
Contributor

Context

💬 Slack: https://gravitywiz.slack.com/archives/C04RQJ232PQ/p1746134330652079

Summary

The does not contain rule renders select of dropdown, instead of the text box.

David's loom explaining the issue:
https://www.loom.com/share/fc3e8050e0284dc480247ad2e35112ff

This PR adds the override for does_not_contain operator as well. Loom Demo: https://www.loom.com/share/5eeed1dd533449eab06cef3088922def

I had initially thought of the approach of using

			gform.addFilter( 'gform_conditional_logic_values_input', function( str, objectType, ruleIndex, selectedFieldId, value ) {
				const operator = jQuery( '#field_rule_operator_' + ruleIndex ).val();
				if ( operator !== 'does_not_contain' ) {
					return str;
				}
				str = '<input type="text" placeholder="' + gf_vars['enterValue'] + '" data-js-rule-input="value" class="gfield_rule_select gfield_rule_input active" id="field_rule_value_' + ruleIndex + '" name="field_rule_value_' + ruleIndex + '" value="' + value + '">';
				return str;
			} );

However, the issue with this approach was that on first render the field_rule_value_ was not defined yet, and we couldn't get does not contain to render the string instead of the dropdown of the values (for this example). It did work fine on frontend and any refresh on the values by adding/removing more rules. However, this solution was clearly lacking the correct behaviour. The issue with this approach:

https://www.loom.com/share/877e59bf2b9147e2aed59527754ec31e

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented May 3, 2025

Walkthrough

This change refines the integration of the "does_not_contain" operator in Gravity Forms conditional logic by inserting it after the "contains" operator, extending the global ruleNeedsTextValue function to recognize it, and improving the JavaScript logic to correctly retrieve values from various input types for evaluation.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
gravity-forms/gw-conditional-logic-operator-does-not-contain.php Inserts the "does_not_contain" operator immediately after "contains" in the operators list; overrides ruleNeedsTextValue to include it; updates JS logic to retrieve values from input/select/textarea elements for accurate evaluation.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • veryspry

Tip

⚡️ Faster reviews with caching
  • CodeRabbit now supports caching for code and dependencies, helping speed up reviews. This means quicker feedback, reduced wait times, and a smoother review experience overall. Cached data is encrypted and stored securely. This feature will be automatically enabled for all accounts on May 16th. To opt out, configure Review - Disable Cache at either the organization or repository level. If you prefer to disable all data retention across your organization, simply turn off the Data Retention setting under your Organization Settings.

Enjoy the performance boost—your workflow just got faster.


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 348da97 and 034102a.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • gravity-forms/gw-conditional-logic-operator-does-not-contain.php (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • gravity-forms/gw-conditional-logic-operator-does-not-contain.php
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@saifsultanc saifsultanc requested a review from spivurno May 5, 2025 17:32
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 8, 2025

Fails
🚫

Commit message '~ Improvements.' does match the correct format. See our Snippet Library Commit Messages Guidelines in Notion.

Warnings
⚠️ When ready, don't forget to request reviews on this pull request from your fellow wizards.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 034102a

@spivurno spivurno merged commit 3957cb6 into master May 8, 2025
2 of 4 checks passed
@spivurno spivurno deleted the saif/fix/gf-does-not-contain-rule-value branch May 8, 2025 02:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants