Support ash destroy action #666
Conversation
| |> Ash.Query.filter(^Ash.Expr.ref(primary_key) in ^ids) | ||
| |> Ash.bulk_destroy!(:destroy, %{}) | ||
|
|
||
| :ok |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do we want to catch errors? Currently, the item action, e.g., Delete, uses try rescue and pattern matches on the error. I don't like this, as the item action itself should not figure out why the deletion failed. In the case of Ash, the bulk delete might contain errors (in the result struct), even if it did not raise an error. I suggest moving the error handling to the adapter. @pehbehbeh
| @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ defmodule Backpex.ItemAction do | |||
| @callback fields() :: list() | |||
|
|
|||
| @doc """ | |||
| TODO: rename to `init_schema` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I want to rename init_change. You might think that this function passes the result as the change / params / attrs into the changeset, but it is used as the source changeset data. WDYT, is init_schema a good name? @pehbehbeh
| @doc """ | ||
| Checks whether item action has confirmation modal. | ||
| """ | ||
| def has_confirm_modal?(item_action) do | ||
| module = Map.fetch!(item_action, :module) | ||
|
|
||
| function_exported?(module, :confirm, 1) | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| @doc """ | ||
| Checks whether item action has form. | ||
| """ | ||
| def has_form?(item_action) do | ||
| module = Map.fetch!(item_action, :module) | ||
|
|
||
| module.fields() != [] | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thought about moving this functions in the item action use block so we can call item_action.has_form?, but I guess we should stick with a simple function inside Backpex.ItemAction. What do you think? @pehbehbeh
| init_schema | ||
| |> changeset_function.(change, metadata) | ||
| |> Map.put(:action, :validate) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still not sure where to place the code that calls the changeset function and if we should move it to another module 🤔 I also did not include special calls like before_changeset. We even state that we do not support advanced fields like HasMany in item actions in our docs (of course, we should change this in the future).
No description provided.