On Aug 28, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Saurabh Sawant wrote:
> They seem fine. Although, having ready to use validators would save
> some time for those learning the framework. I personally expected
> those validators to be already there while I was learning.
Trouble is, there's an endless list of pattern expressions that can be useful.
IS_MATCH is pretty powerful, and should be in your bag of tricks (in fact,
IS_ALPHANUMERIC just calls IS_MATCH).
At the very least, consider that you might want a language-dependent
IS_LETTERS, or at least one that accepts the common alphabetic variants.
However, if you do that, do it this way:
IS_MATCH('[0-9]+', strict=True)
IS_MATCH('[a-zA-Z]+', strict=True)
strict=True forces a $ at the end of the regex. Or you can just include the $.
(IS_MATCH is already anchored at the beginning of the string.)
>
> On Aug 28, 11:05 pm, Massimo Di Pierro <massimo.dipie...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> what's wrong with?
>>
>> IS_MATCH('[0-9]+')
>> IS_MATCH('[a-zA-Z]+')
>>
>> On Aug 28, 12:59 pm, Saurabh Sawant <ris...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> But IS_ALPHANUMERIC by virtue of its name suggests both letters and
>>> numbers. Having separate validators for each of the cases would make
>>> the code more readable.
>>
>>> db.auth_user.first_name.requires=IS_LETTERS()
>>> db.auth_user.age.requires=IS_DIGITS()
>
