The attached patch removes all instances of uses of hook_submit() attached for settings forms. The weights form is unaffected. Variable names remain same. Tested and revised but still needs review.

CommentFileSizeAuthor
#2 faq_hook_submit_removal_1.patch12.23 KBGurpartap Singh
#1 faq_hook_submit_removal_0.patch12.23 KBGurpartap Singh
faq_hook_submit_removal.patch12.23 KBGurpartap Singh

Comments

Gurpartap Singh’s picture

Gurpartap Singh commented
StatusFileSize
new faq_hook_submit_removal_0.patch12.23 KB

Removed a little debug code which was used to test if taxonomy module exists..

Gurpartap Singh’s picture

Gurpartap Singh commented
StatusFileSize
new faq_hook_submit_removal_1.patch12.23 KB

Opps attached the same one above. This is correct one, hopefully...

stella’s picture

stella commented
Assigned: Gurpartap Singh » stella
Status: Needs review » Fixed

added to CVS

Anonymous’s picture

(not verified) commented
Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)
stella’s picture

stella commented

Released in faq-5.x-2.3.

Cheers,
Stella

nancydru’s picture

nancydru
she/her/hers
Primary language English
Location Boston
commented

Hmm. It's my understanding that the "proper" way to handle a form is to use hook_validate to check the input and then hook_submit to actually store the data. That way you don't end up saving the values until everything passes validation.

stella’s picture

stella commented

That's true in cases where you want to validate the data entered and where at least part of the data entered is not a system variable setting. For configuration forms that only contain system variables which are to be set in the "variable" table, you can use the system_settings_form() function.