rule input naming restrictions

I can reproduce this behavior in both a!textField() and a!paragraphField(), Appian 21.1  -- a very interesting bug.  I assume it's not expected behavior.

With 20.4 it works as expected. Seems to be specific to 21.1. Did you open a support case to report this behavior?

I of course can't confirm what Appian version , who posted this, is on... but i'd be curious to confirm.

As an aside, I've also just confirmed that this issue follows for the "instructions", "placeholder", "labelPosition", and "inputPurpose" parameters.  And, I assume, other text-based parameters.

Appian 20.4

what steps did you follow when trying to reproduce?  Others here seem to confirm that it affects all versions back to at least 20.3...

Hm ... do you have a full example including the rule inputs for me?

I remember that there was an issue with similar named rule inputs in the past. But only in very specific situations which I cannot remember:

It was very simple for me to reproduce.  Create a new/unsaved interface, add a text rule input called "label", set the parameters up like in any of my screenshots, then type a value into the component.  Immediately upon execution of the saveInto, the text is replaced with the literal value that had been defined under the component parameter with the matching name, just like in the initial video.

It was very simple for me to reproduce.  Create a new/unsaved interface, add a text rule input called "label", set the parameters up like in any of my screenshots, then type a value into the component.  Immediately upon execution of the saveInto, the text is replaced with the literal value that had been defined under the component parameter with the matching name, just like in the initial video.

I missed the saveInto action. I had that before and I believe this is a "known behavior". And it was discussed here some time(years) ago.

In my daily work I do not save into rule inputs with keyword names. Let's say, besides "saveInto".

Unknown said:

In my daily work I do not save into rule inputs with keyword names

I agree - I avoid it for standard practice, however I assume there are valid use cases (and of course a programming language shouldn't *actively punish* sloppy coding, especially when it's technically correct to boot).

Agreed :-)

Checked knowledge base

community.appian.com/.../kb-1098-input-variables-named-after-sail-keywords-don-t-take-the-value-that-is-assigned-to-them

Wow, just think this has been sitting there all this time (and it seems strange to me that it hasn't gotten fixed eventually...)