From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 530FE1FF141 for ; Tue, 05 May 2026 15:28:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2DE163A8D; Tue, 5 May 2026 15:28:04 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 15:27:28 +0200 Message-Id: To: "Dominik Csapak" Subject: Re: [PATCH yew-widget-toolkit v2] widget: form: number: round floats to some decimal precision From: "Christoph Heiss" X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20260327102731.490175-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <12d9ae9f-86f3-46e3-92ba-90eea536a0d4@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <12d9ae9f-86f3-46e3-92ba-90eea536a0d4@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1777987542207 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.076 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 SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: TCZQVJMAUYOEQHZ24OUMR5UQTGS5E6MN X-Message-ID-Hash: TCZQVJMAUYOEQHZ24OUMR5UQTGS5E6MN X-MailFrom: c.heiss@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: yew-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Yew framework devel list at Proxmox List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue Apr 7, 2026 at 3:58 PM CEST, Dominik Csapak wrote: > this patch only changes the precision during step_up/down or am > I missing something here? > > If we do have such a precision field/decimal property, > it should have an effect also on read/write value, > renderer etc. (like i wrote in my last message) > > e.g. if i would set a value of '3.00001' with 'decimal_places' > set to '1', it would not change the current behavior? Right, yeah, good catch. Sent a v2 with (hopefully) all that addressed: https://lore.proxmox.com/yew-devel/20260505132650.1158715-1-c.heiss@proxmox= .com/