FEEL error reported switches

[nikku]

Describe the bug

Using the modelers validation feature leads to different errors flashing when invalid FEEL content is entered to a field:

It looks like two different validations kick in, resulting in different error messages.

Steps to reproduce

1. Model a service task
2. Enter broken FEEL expression in type field
3. Re-focus node
4. See error message switching (cf. above).

Expected behavior

A clear, meaningful, and stable error message is shown to me as a user. At best it indicates that FEEL is the format of the (expected) language. If possible the editor itself establishes additional context (red caret?).

Environment

• OS: Linux
• Camunda Modeler Version: v5.15.0
• Execution Platform: Any
• Installed plug-ins: None

Additional context

No response

[philippfromme]

Can reproduce. Probably due to https://github.com/bpmn-io/properties-panel/blob/425c1f6f53fa3607e2c4f4fc0d69d66147346bb3/src/components/entries/FEEL/Feel.js#L526.

[smbea]

This happens because the syntax error takes a while to come through, so it uses the error it already has.
I'm not sure it's possible to speed up how the error analysis in the feel editor (I'm not familiar with it but I didn't see any bug that needed fixing). So what should be our strategy for these cases? Maybe delaying would work, but it seems a bit like patch work.

[philippfromme]

I think the hierarchy of const error = localError || temporaryError || validationError; is quite arbitrary. First local, then global, then local again? We could decide to just change it to const error = temporaryError || localError || validationError;, meaning const error = globalError || localError || editorError;.

[smbea]

@philippfromme So in these cases, we prioritize the linting over the syntax error. Meaning the user just gets a "not valid" feedback

[barmac]

If I understand this correctly, the human-readable "This is not a valid FEEL expression" would get priority, but user could still see the exact editor error if they highlight the error.

Makes sense to me.

[smbea]

Ah that makes sense then, didn't think of that. Thanks for explaining. I vouch for this then and will follow up.