From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 971E5935F9 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:12:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 73D12253BF for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:11:31 +0100 (CET) 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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:11:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6FDC747CC9 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:11:29 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:11:27 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.0 From: Matthias Heiserer To: Dominik Csapak , Proxmox VE development discussion , Stefan Sterz Cc: Thomas Lamprecht References: <20230215144619.1475962-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> <74529df9-3161-6918-9a2d-5940e3716e47@proxmox.com> <30cf2d2b-104c-4546-08e4-d813d255c2a9@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.174 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.09 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 widget-toolkit] ui: remove extra parenthesis from check to avoid eslint error X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 10:12:01 -0000 On 15.02.2023 16:37, Dominik Csapak wrote: > On 2/15/23 16:22, Matthias Heiserer wrote: >> On 15.02.2023 16:03, Dominik Csapak wrote: >>> On 2/15/23 15:46, Stefan Sterz wrote: >>>> with the additional parenthesis eslint throws an error due to the >>>> "no-extra-parens" rule that avoids unnecessary parenthesis. remove >>>> them to get rid of the error. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Sterz >>>> --- >>>> i am personally not too happy with this eslint requirement here, but >>>> the widget toolkit won't build otherwise. >>>> >>>>   src/window/DiskSmart.js | 2 +- >>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/src/window/DiskSmart.js b/src/window/DiskSmart.js >>>> index b538ea1..be52a4e 100644 >>>> --- a/src/window/DiskSmart.js >>>> +++ b/src/window/DiskSmart.js >>>> @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ Ext.define('Proxmox.window.DiskSmart', { >>>>           { >>>>           name: 'real-value', >>>>           // FIXME remove with next major release (PBS 3.0) >>>> -        calculate: data => (data.normalized ?? false) ? data.raw : >>>> data.value, >>>> +        calculate: data => data.normalized ?? false ? data.raw : >>>> data.value, >>>>           }, >>>>           { >>>>           name: 'real-normalized', >>> >>> >>> imho the '?? false' part is unnecessary since that expression will >>> already be coerced to a >>> boolean and null and undefined are falsy... >>> >>> so i'd be happy with >>> ---- >>> data.normalized ? data.raw : data.value, >> Then that's bug in my original patch, as we should only fall back to >> data.raw when data.normalized doesn't exist (i.e. old api version). > > so if i understand correctly, you want > > data.normalized === undefined || data.normalized === null ? data.raw : > data.value > > ? > if normalized is null/undefined return raw, otherwise value? I reviewed the changes again and it seems I got confused somewhere along the way. PBS got the new field 'raw_value', PVE the new field 'normalized'. So if either of these is missing, it's the old API version. // all super duper verbose: // real-value: // prior to the PBS patch, it would return nothing here. But that's what // we used to display previously, so might as well keep it return data.raw // real-normalized if (data.normalized === undefined) || (data.raw === undefined) { return data.value; } else { return data.normalized; } But maybe can you find another mistake in my reasoning > > >>> ---- >>> >>> any thoughts @thomas? >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pve-devel mailing list >>> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com >>> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >>> >>> >> > >