Skip to content

feat(isDate): Disallow mismatching length for isDate #2056

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
frederike-ramin wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

feat(isDate): Disallow mismatching length for isDate #2056

frederike-ramin wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

@frederike-ramin
Copy link
Contributor

@frederike-ramin frederike-ramin commented Oct 4, 2022

Before this, if I provided a format to the isDate function, it was never checked that the format exactly matches - including the length of the date. I could have provided any possible date as long as I only included valid delimiters.
Important: I only changed this for strictMode because I think there it should 100% be checked, but maybe there are cases (without strictMode) where it is okay? If you want me to remove the strictMode condition, just let me know.

Checklist

  • PR contains only changes related; no stray files, etc.
  • README updated (where applicable)
  • Tests written (where applicable)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 4, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.95%. Comparing base (b958bd7) to head (efb3f8f).
Report is 68 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2056      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   99.95%   99.95%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         107      107              
  Lines        2454     2450       -4     
  Branches      619      620       +1     
==========================================
- Hits         2453     2449       -4     
  Partials        1        1

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@braaar
Copy link
Contributor

braaar commented Oct 5, 2022

In my opinion, that option should be renamed to strict, in line with other validators. We can maintain backwards compatibility by also allowing strictMode, but the documentation should only mention strict

WikiRik
WikiRik previously approved these changes Jan 30, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@WikiRik WikiRik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The comment from @braaar is valid, but for a future PR. This PR looks good to me

@braaar
Copy link
Contributor

braaar commented Jan 31, 2023

The comment from @braaar is valid, but for a future PR. This PR looks good to me

Perhaps it's reasonable to leave behind a TODO-comment in that case?

@WikiRik
Copy link
Member

WikiRik commented Jan 31, 2023

Perhaps it's reasonable to leave behind a TODO-comment in that case?

That might be good. isMobilePhone also contains strictMode but we'll pick that up as part of #2124 so no need to put a TODO there

@frederike-ramin
Copy link
Contributor Author

frederike-ramin commented Nov 24, 2023

@WikiRik any progress on this? Do we need another review? I now want to include the same thing in another project, so the topic is on the top of my mind again.

@WikiRik
Copy link
Member

WikiRik commented Nov 24, 2023

That's up to @profnandaa

@rubiin rubiin added the mc-to-land Just merge-conflict standing between the PR and landing. label Jun 1, 2024
@sonikishan sonikishan mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2024
Merged
4 tasks
@sonikishan
Copy link
Contributor

sonikishan commented Oct 23, 2024

New PR #2481 with resolved conflict.

@WikiRik
Copy link
Member

WikiRik commented Mar 20, 2025

Merged in #2481

@WikiRik WikiRik closed this Mar 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@WikiRik WikiRik WikiRik left review comments

@pano9000 pano9000 Awaiting requested review from pano9000

@profnandaa profnandaa Awaiting requested review from profnandaa

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

mc-to-land Just merge-conflict standing between the PR and landing.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@frederike-ramin @braaar @WikiRik @sonikishan @rubiin