From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2923EE305
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 13:36:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0BA741EC4C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 13:36:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 13:36:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2426248D41
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 13:36:07 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <9fd2a62c-7976-346d-b0f5-45e4424cdf42@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 13:36:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.15.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20230707080230.11949-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <e215d978-0e79-41e0-a37a-142fb2324495@proxmox.com>
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <e215d978-0e79-41e0-a37a-142fb2324495@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.655 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -1.473 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 stable-7+master manager 1/2] ui: vm
 selector: handle empty string gracefully
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 11:36:08 -0000

Am 25.09.23 um 13:17 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> 
> sorry for the late answer
> 
> the patch LGTM, but i would even go a step further and do a
> ----
> value ??= [];
> ----
> 
> before the isArray check (that way we'd also handle undefined/null values)
> (can ofc be done as a follow-up/later)
> 
> 
> an alternative would be to filter out all empty values e.g. like this:
> 
> ---
> value.split(',').filter(v => v !== '')
> ---
> 
> this would then also handle values like: '100,,200'
> idk if that's even possible to get here
> 

Thank you for the review! I'll send a v3 with the suggested changes.