I've got a working implementation for a plugin that allows an
alternative syntax for the validation_helpers plugin's methods (http://
pastie.org/662251.txt):
def validate
validates do
name do
presence
max_length 10
end
date do
format %r{\d\d/\d\d/\d\d\d\d}
end
number do
presence
integer
end
end
end
This syntax is a lot more verbose than the standard syntax, but I have
a fairly specific use case in mind. The project I'm working on
currently has a table with about 80-90 columns all with validation
requirements. Using the standard syntax, it's difficult to see what
validations apply to each column, since the validations are sorted by
type of validation (e.g. presence, max_length), not by column.
This type of syntax allows me to basically print out the validation
code, sit with project manager, and make sure all desired validations
are being enforced. I think it is more natural to think of all
validations for a given column, versus all columns with a certain
validation type.
Of course, if you only have a few columns, this syntax is just more
verbose. This syntax really only has an advantage when you have many
columns and it is difficult to look at your validate method and see
what validations are being applied to what columns.
Anyway, I'd like to get some feedback as to whether people think this
should be added to the plugins that ship with Sequel.
Also, I'd like to thank Rich Kilmer for the general idea of this type
of syntax. I got the idea from his LoneStar RubyConf presentation on
"Encoding Domains".
Jeremy
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sequel-talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to sequel-talk@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sequel-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
