Sure. My scenario is a bit different.
I have an application form that needs to be filled in by a user. If the user is not registered on my site I have a few fields that allow the user to quickly enter name and email and their account will be created when the application is submitted. At the same time, the application allows a user to pick from a list of documents they've uploaded. However, I also have fields incase a user would like to upload a document that is not on the list (to save them the hassle of going back, uploading and returning to the application). Therefore, my application will always have a new @application and sometimes a new @user or @document. The document model is polymorphic. The application belongs_to the user and has a field for document_id but I did not create an explicit relationship in the model. Thanks for any help. On Apr 8, 1:03 am, Ram <yourstruly.vi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmmm.. Are Cat and Dog associated to the Person model? > > > there may not always be a @cat or @dog > > Meaning the parameters for these models will be passed in from the > form but they will be empty? In which case you can have a > before_validation callback and check if all the params for these > models are blank. If they are, then return false. This will still > throw a "Cat/Dog is invalid" validation error. That can be handled by > hacking into error_messages_for. Its all quite ugly but it works. > I can tell you more if you can explain the context better. > > On Apr 7, 2:26 pm, sshefer <shai.she...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Jim Neath's walkthru (http://jimneath.org/2008/09/06/multi-model-forms- > > validations-in-ruby-on-rails/) talks about validating multiple objects > > before saving. His example is below: > > > if @person.valid? & @cat.valid? & @dog.valid? > > Person.transaction do > > @person.save! > > @cat.save! > > @dog.save! > > end > > else > > FAIL > > end > > > I am trying to do something similar but in my situation there may not > > always be a @cat or @dog (there will always be a @person though). > > Does anyone know of a way that I can run the same validation but allow > > for the conditional presence of the 2 objects? > > > Thanks. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
