[Docs - Field] Order of "disabled()" & "relationship()"

[Ahmant]

Mention that it's necessary to define disabled() before relationship().

// ❌
SomeField::make('users')
    ->relationship('users', 'name')
    ->disabled()

// ✅
SomeField::make('users')
    ->disabled()
    ->relationship('users', 'name')

Because dehydrated() in relationship() will be overrided by the one in disabled()

// vendor\filament\forms\src\Components\Concerns\CanBeDisabled.php - Line 17
$this->dehydrated(fn (Component $component): bool => ! $component->evaluate($condition));

[danharrin]

Not all fields have relationship(), and not all relationship() call dehydrated(), so I'm not sure if this belongs on the Getting Started page. Should we add it multiple times on more specific pages?

[Ahmant]

I see your point.

I this situation we only have 3 components with relationship(), and in all these 3 components the dehydrated() function is called, so adding that note 3 times will not be bad.

• CheckboxList
  • Path: forms\src\Components\CheckboxList.php
  • Line: 194
• Repeater
  • Path: forms\src\Components\Repeater.php
  • Line: 914
• Select
  • Path: forms\src\Components\Select.php
  • Line: 984

And note that the order will make an issue only when $someCondition == true in disabled($someCondition), because in this case dehydrated will become false:

// filament\forms\src\Components\Concerns\CanBeDisabled.php
public function disabled(bool | Closure $condition = true): static
{
    $this->isDisabled = $condition;
 👉 $this->dehydrated(fn (Component $component): bool => ! $component->evaluate($condition));

    return $this;
}

Is this right or I'm missing something?

[Ahmant]

I'm unsure if it's worth adding this to the documentation, but it took me around 4 hours maybe to figure out. After upgrading from v2 to v3, I encountered an error when saving my record, which was caused by this incorrect order.

Strangely, it worked in v2 but not in v3 🤷‍♂️.

[danharrin]

Let's add the note to those 3 separate pages then, instead of Getting Started

In v2, we didn't disable dehydration for disabled fields by default, thats why the issue wasn't there

[Ahmant]

Ok 👌, I will add them, and push them for review

[Ahmant]

I pushed the changes.

But I made a mistake in my previous statement.

And note that the order will make an issue only when $someCondition == true in disabled($someCondition), because in this case dehydrated will become false:

The dehydrated in the relationship() must be false (it is by default), so the order will make an issue when $someCondition == false in disabled($someCondition), because in this case dehydrated will become true: