[BUG] sxc.data does not allow null number fields

[enfJoao]

Bug Affects...

[x] Content Types or data management

Current Behavior / Expected Behavior

Age is a number field. It's optional, so it can be null/empty.
If I edit the entity with 2sxc UI, I can leave the field empty and the api will accept null.
However, at web api this does not happen.
If an int field gets a null value (or empty string), it always returns a 400:
https://c.y.pt/api/2sxc/app/auto/data/eType/66 400 (Bad Request)

To Reproduce (Steps, Videos, Screenshots, Apps)

eSvc = $2sxc(moduleId).data('eType');

const updatedE = {
    // a lot of working fields here
    Age: null
};

eSvc.update(eId, updatedE);

If I set Age to any valid number, it works as intended.

Your environment

• 2sxc version(s): 20.50
• DNN / Oqtane: Dnn 10.01

[iJungleboy]

I assume if you don't set the age at all, it will work, correct?

So probably "ommit" works, but "null" does not.

[enfJoao]

With js apis, no way to "ommit". Or am I missing something?
If you're asking about an object without the Age property, yes, it works.

[iJungleboy]

in JS you can omit or delete properties, prior to sending.
for example,

var x = {
  Age: null,
};
delete x.Age;

You can also do optional adding, ca. like this:

var age = null;
var x = {
  Name: '...',
  ...(age == null ? {} : { Age: age } ),
}

So this should work. But yes, I agree that the API should probably be more permissive, just don't know if we can find the time to fit it in.

[enfJoao]

This is an update task, so deleting or omitting Age will keep the previously stored value, which beats the purpose of updating (for removing the value, for example).
Age does not accept anything other than a valid int, so neither null nor {} nor '' works with this api. The ternary will not solve anything.

[iJungleboy]

i think this could be fixed quite quickly, but we need too long to setup a test case.

Do you have an app we could use to verify the problem?

[enfJoao]

2sxcApp_IntTest2sxc_0.0.20.zip

Sponsered by chatgpt.
Line 54 sets empty values as nulls.
Curiously, this time it just ignores the property instead of throwing a 400. Don't know what changed.