fix: add missing validation to admission period backend

[SanderArntzen]

Closes #52

Summary of changes

• add validation to admission period backend (formatting the dates received by the backend to "YYYY-MM-DD" and checking that the date is valid, and check that the start date is before the end date
• add format to the dates sent from frontend, so they just contain the "date-part", not the "time-part"

Testing

The code can be tested both through frontend and Postman.

[LiviaValenti]

I am not able to use the frontend with these changes in backend. 😮 If the backend is to expect the format YYYY-MM-DD validating it through regex, you have to update the frontend to send it in that format. ✂️

Another alternative is to find another way to validate the date completely. I don't have any tips at the moment for that, but I know handling dates are tricky 😅

[SanderArntzen]

I am not able to use the frontend with these changes in backend. 😮 If the backend is to expect the format YYYY-MM-DD validating it through regex, you have to update the frontend to send it in that format. ✂️

Another alternative is to find another way to validate the date completely. I don't have any tips at the moment for that, but I know handling dates are tricky 😅

I will take a closer look on the format for how the frontend sends tha dates. The reason for using regex was that I haven't found a good way to validate date yet. Validating dates are some tricky stuff

[eivindkopperud]

I will take a closer look on the format for how the frontend sends tha dates. The reason for using regex was that I haven't found a good way to validate date yet. Validating dates are some tricky stuff

Since you have the ISO 8601 format on the datestrings, you can parse it with const date = new Date(theString). If the string is valid, it will create a date object. If not, it will cause some sort of exception. Then you can call date.toISOString() to get it in the format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS. If you only want the first part, you can do .split("T") or do a .substring.

The advantage I see for this approach is that the frontend doesn't need to care about what format it sends, as long as it at least has YYYY-MM-DD. The con is that strings such as 200-01-01 is a valid datetime (January 1st, 200), which might cause weird behavior

I won't necessarily say its more clean, but it is a solution!

[SanderArntzen]

I will take a closer look on the format for how the frontend sends tha dates. The reason for using regex was that I haven't found a good way to validate date yet. Validating dates are some tricky stuff

Since you have the ISO 8601 format on the datestrings, you can parse it with const date = new Date(theString). If the string is valid, it will create a date object. If not, it will cause some sort of exception. Then you can call date.toISOString() to get it in the format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS. If you only want the first part, you can do .split("T") or do a .substring.

The advantage I see for this approach is that the frontend doesn't need to care about what format it sends, as long as it at least has YYYY-MM-DD. The con is that strings such as 200-01-01 is a valid datetime (January 1st, 200), which might cause weird behavior

I won't necessarily say its more clean, but it is a solution!

Thanks for the suggestions, I have used some of them in the new version of the code

[Xtrah]

Can't test this without updated fixtures 😁

When I load now admissionPeriodResponse is { start_date: undefined, end_date: undefined }. Can you check that frontend loads and works for you after you update and load fixtures?

[SanderArntzen]

Can't test this without updated fixtures 😁

When I load now admissionPeriodResponse is { start_date: undefined, end_date: undefined }. Can you check that frontend loads and works for you after you update and load fixtures?

I have now changed the code so it works with the fixture. It also works through frontend

[LiviaValenti]

Sure, one can send in silly values like 2420-69-69, but at least it does not crash anything. 🥂

It also sends nice error-messages back and works as expected. I suggested a small improvement to the commenting, but either way you have done a great job 🎇

LGTM 🚀

[SanderArntzen]

Sure, one can send in silly values like 2420-69-69, but at least it does not crash anything. 🥂

It also sends nice error-messages back and works as expected. I suggested a small improvement to the commenting, but either way you have done a great job 🎇

LGTM 🚀

Oh, nice you found that. Originally there was a check for non-existing dates, but it must have gone missing somewhere. I have implemented it again in the latest fix-commit