delimiter bug

[jarvojta]

We discovered a issue with decimal delimiters in the recent updates. Today I found it even in the most recent update (1.0.3 - Matternhorn (10003993)). I have several fields  where a decimals should be inserted by user. It worked perfectly depending on the device settings. That means users with global language set to English  were able to use dot "." as decimal delimiter and users with Czech language used comma "," as a delimiter. Nothing else was allowed by the app.
Now comes the bug in the new versions which I will describe for English setting. Currently, both dot and comma are seemingly allowed for input by the application. However, when the user inputs comma, the number will be stored as a whole number (e.g. 15 instead of 1.5).

[3nids]

isn't this because the coma is considered as a thousand delimiter?

[jarvojta]

Yes, you are right. It was my mistake that it happens on devices with Czech settings. However, I find it still confusing. The user could wrongly expect comma as delimiter and will input terribly wrong data when working on device with language set to English but with form in any language language with "," as decimal delimiter) . The English user can accidentally input wrong number as well, although it is less probable. 1,5 could be meant as 15, 1.5 or 1,500 but Qfield writes 15 without warning.
It would be nice if QField would not accept anything else than numbers with exactly 3 digits after comma when the language is set to English. Another great improvement would be that one can set the right number format for the project independently on the device settings.

[phardy-egis]

We noticed this bug as well, I can provide detail if required. Has it been fixed yet ? Waiting for a fix, is there a good practice to follow in order to avoid this bug ?

[9m-andre]

Hello, we also have this problem in french QField : we cannot input a decimal number. We only have . and - in the numeric pad and 1.5 become 15. ... Not really useful to enter surfaces.

[nirvn]

@9m-andre , @jarvojta , are things better in QField 3.5? We fixed an issue on that front a while back.

[github-actions]

The QField project highly values your report and would love to see it addressed. However, this issue has been left in feedback mode for the last 14 days and is being automatically marked as "stale". If you would like to continue with this issue, please provide any missing information or answer any open questions. If you could resolve the issue yourself meanwhile, please leave a note for future readers with the same problem and close the issue.
In case you should have any uncertainty, please leave a comment and we will be happy to help you proceed with this issue.
If there is no further activity on this issue, it will be closed in a week.