Renaming it to: .prevent_html_escaping would make it unambiguous, and
>> directly refer to what is actually being done (so that the programmer
>> doesn't have to infer what "safe" means, precisely).
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
Well, on second thought, I'm not so sure if I find the effort warranted.
But if th
Bikeshedding! Count me in.
How 'bout #is_safe_html.
> On 5/02/2015, at 18:59 , Rainer Frey wrote:
>
>
>
> Renaming it to: .prevent_html_escaping would make it unambiguous, and
> directly refer to what is actually being done (so that the programmer doesn't
> have to infer what "safe" means
I'd find it extremely useful. The current implementation sucks, for various
reasons.
Actually, what you expect when you use *distance_of_time_in_words*, and
what arguably should be the default in rails, is for it to *output
precisely what you input*.
The method is not called *rounded_distance_o
I'd like to gauge interest in adding support for different column names for
ActiveModel::SecurePassword. Currently, has_secure_password assumes that
the column name for the attribute you want to encrypt is simply "password."
Obviously, this may not always be the column name of the data you're tr
In years of using Rails it has never occurred to me that the name
"html_safe" can be ambiguous until just now when I read this thread.
When is a developer going to stumble across this method without knowing
what it means and insert it blindly into their code? If it really *is
*ambiguous,
peopl
On Feb 5, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Magne wrote:
> I'd find it extremely useful. The current implementation sucks, for various
> reasons.
>
> Actually, what you expect when you use distance_of_time_in_words, and what
> arguably should be the default in rails, is for it to output precisely what
> you
On Thursday, Feb 5, 2015 at 3:40 PM, t...@t0dd.io , wrote:
I'd like to gauge interest in adding support for different column names for
ActiveModel::SecurePassword. Currently, has_secure_password assumes that the
column name for the attribute you want to encrypt is simply "password."
Obviously,
