Add a new action to display the entity title but hide the field

#1: entityreference_prepopulate-add_action_option_value-2028735-1.patch queued for re-testing.

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,17 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            $form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]['label']['#markup'] = preg_replace('#^(.*)\s\([0-9]+\)$#', '$1', $form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]['label']['#default_value']);

Can you explain this part?

+++ b/plugins/behavior/EntityReferencePrepopulateInstanceBehavior.class.php
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ class EntityReferencePrepopulateInstanceBehavior extends EntityReference_Behavio
+        'value' => t('Only show entity title'),

value => item

> The first part removes the entity ID to only let its title (better for UX I think).

Can't we just use entity_label() form the entity ID instead?

Basicly the test is ok expect for two things:
1. You try to verify that the field was replaced by the label but you weren't in the node edit/create form, so the text was not available.
2. You didn't verify in the test that the value option is applied on the edit of the node. I added this part in test.

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,17 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            $form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]['label']['#markup'] = preg_replace('#^(.*)\s\([0-9]+\)$#', '$1', $form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]['label']['#default_value']);

I suspect you test this only with autocomplete, and not with a select list (where we won't have the entity ID in brackets). So let's use entity_label().

I'm trying to figure now.

After some investigation the correct way is:

$form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]['label']['#markup'] = $id ? entity_label($field['settings']['target_type'], entity_load_single($entity_type, $id)) : entity_label($field['settings']['target_type'], $entities[$ids[$delta]]);

Because when creating the entity the $id don't have a value. Any way, i think this is a bit messy.

Also, have you tried this feature with select list as @amitaibu mention before? With select list the the feature don't work because element_children($form[$field_name][$lang]) is returning nothing is the list will not be a markup but remains a select list.

Instead of working with the form try calling entityreference_prepopulate_get_values()

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,35 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+          foreach ($entities as $tmp_entity) {

maybe $tmp_entity => $entity_item ?

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,35 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            $entities_labels[] = entity_label($field['settings']['target_type'], $tmp_entity);

XSS! :) use check_plain()

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,35 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            $form[$field_name][$lang . '_label']['#markup'] = theme('item_list', array('items' => $entities_labels));

In that case don't use #markup, use the #theme => 'item_list'

I'm attaching a minor fix the patch: i try to verify that when the widget type is select list and the user editing the entity the label of the entities should appear - that didn't occurred. When editing, the $ids variable does not holds the populated field values. I fixed that and verified that in the simple test.

Fixing typo.

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,45 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            // No prepopulated values has been found. Load the value from the

has => have

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,45 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+          foreach (element_children($form[$field_name][$lang]) as $delta => $element) {
+            unset($form[$field_name][$lang][$delta]);

We can just create a new element as assign to to $form[$field_name][$lang] -- instead of iterating and unsetting the existing element.

removing the unset is working for me but for the simple test can't handle it:

@DuaelFr you'r right with you said. I don't know how the prepopulated save the value in the fields but i made a few changes.

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,49 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            // No prepopulated values has been found. Load the value from the

has => have

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,49 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+            foreach ($entity->{$field_name}[$langcode] as $value) {

Why not use $wrapper?

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.module
@@ -109,6 +109,49 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+          $title = $form[$field_name]['und']['#title'];

'und' should probably be $langcode?

XSS - make sure to use check_plain()

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.moduleundefined
@@ -109,6 +109,55 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+              for ($i = 0; $i < $wrapper->{$field_name}->count(); $i++) {

no need for this, just do $ids = $wrapper->{$field_name}->value(array('identifier' => TRUE));

+++ b/entityreference_prepopulate.moduleundefined
@@ -109,6 +109,55 @@ function entityreference_prepopulate_field_attach_form($entity_type, $entity, &$
+          if (!$ids) {

btw, When would we have an $ids with values?

We have $ids when we in a URL like: node/add/article?field_node_ref=1

I've been using this in production for nearly a year now and works great

Added #2126203: new action type in prepopulate : Display rendered entity as related issue, as this behavior is possible to replicate using a display mode.

If this works, why isn't it commited yet? Now I have to patch ERP :<

hello ... hi please

for this issue , which patch can apply safely please ?

#36 was committed to 7.x-1.x-dev! :) Thanks all!