On Jan 5, 3:22 pm, tonypm wrote:
> I tend these days to always use the full descriptive words -
Definitely not in a case like this. The set of three values here maps
*perfectly* to SQL-style 3-valued logic -- so use it! Store this as a
boolean value.
A larger set of strings could be stored directly in a character field
in the database, but if the number is under 100 or so, I'd advise
creating a separate table and simply referring to the strings by
foreign key. This practice will avoid all sorts of data normalization
issues. I'd never dream of storing a small number of repeating
strings as literal text the way you're suggesting.
> memory
> implications are small, but it is easier to directly display the value
> than have code to expand it wherever it is used.
Not really -- especially if the application should run in more than
one language.
> It also tends to
> make the code logic easier to follow.
Again, not really. You have to explicitly test for == 'yes' rather
than simply testing for truth or falsehood.
>
> tonypm
Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
mar...@marnen.org
http://www.marnen.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
