On 22/07/07, court3nay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jul 22, 2007, at 1:14 PM, "Damian Janowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > > > On 7/22/07, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> def new > >> @customer = Customer.new > >> end > >> > >> That @customer is never going to be validated, but it does make sense > >> for it to have its defaults (which belong in the model and not the > >> controller or the view) set correctly so that 'new.rhtml' doesn't > >> need > >> any knowledge of any default values when rendering the form. > > > > Really hear you on that one. > > > > If we need to deal with default values in a better way, why not > > something like... > > > > class Foo < ActiveRecord::Base > > default :attrib, :to => 1 > > default :another_attrib, :to => :another_attrib_defaulter > > > > protected > > def another_attrib_defaulter > > # ... > > end > > end > > > > The second parameter being a hash for some readability and potentially > > for some more features... > > > > Thoughts? > > Does default belong in the schema as it is essentially a db > functionality?
No it isn't. Consider the use case of the newly created 'template' object that's used by new.rhtml in some generic controller; this never goes near the database, but still needs to have its defaults correctly set. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
