Skip to content
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.

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

Fixed #15804 - Advance Filtering is broken (revert PR #15594 changes) #15808

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2024

Conversation

rosenthalj
Copy link
Contributor

@rosenthalj rosenthalj commented Jun 7, 2024

This PR reverts the changes made in PR #15594

This PR also fixes issue #15778

This PR fixes the functionality of the PrimeNG's Table Advance Filters which was "Critically" broken when trying to fix issue #15557. Note: PR #15594 actually only partially fixed issue #15557.

This PR also breaks issue #15557. Since the problem identified in issue #15557 has been in PrimeNG for multiple years without being fixed, I believe it is better to fix the Advance Filter immediately and in the future develop a more holistic/complete fix for issue #15557 that doesn't "critically" break Advance Table Filters

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jun 7, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
primeng ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Visit Preview Jun 7, 2024 8:41am

@rosenthalj rosenthalj changed the title Fixed #15804 - Advance Filtering is broken Fixed #15804 - Advance Filtering is broken (revert PR #15594 changes) Jun 7, 2024
@rosenthalj
Copy link
Contributor Author

rosenthalj commented Jun 10, 2024

Over the weekend I have been thinking about the how to FULLY fix this problem (issue #15811, issue #15778, issue #15557). I believe that the best/proper solution is when the filter overlay/dialog is hidden (via the hide method or any other means) the overlay/dialog is completely destroyed. When the the filter/dialog is displayed, it is always created and filled with the current filter setting. This is obviously not a trivial solution or this bug would have fixed (or initially implemented) years ago with this approach.

I believe that this PR #15808 (reverting changes made by PR #15594), is the most prudent near-term fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants