Comments on: Sexy Validation in Edge Rails (Rails 3)

By: Delicious Bookmarks for August 21st through August 22nd « Lâmôlabs

Delicious Bookmarks for August 21st through August 22nd « Lâmôlabs — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 20:04:58 +0000

[...] Sexy Validation in Edge Rails (Rails 3) « The Lucid – August 21st ( tags: rails3 rails validation ruby activerecord validations programming rubyonrails examples ) [...]

By: Jamie

Jamie — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:54:55 +0000

@Bob I would be inclined to just write a custom validate method for validations this complex.

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 22:11:09 +0000

Any way to do a validation in stages, for example

1> check that last_name, first_name, and address aren’t blank
2> combine them into a variable in the model called validate
3> make sure that validate is unique

Hopefully this would make sure that a person doesn’t have two records, and allow a common name to have 2 different addresses.

I used before_validation and after_validation in 2.x, but not sure here

Thanks
Bob

By: Jamie

Jamie — Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:49:28 +0000

@Jay I can see that may be hard to track down if you accidentally leave the “s” off. I don’t really see it as a design flaw though, how about setting up some syntax highlighting to warn when the singular is used (bright red or something)?

By: =>Rockets and Bangs! at the Ji-V Hackathon | mattkopecki

=>Rockets and Bangs! at the Ji-V Hackathon | mattkopecki — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 05:23:15 +0000

[...] to all these new concepts that I had never worked with before. By the end of the day, I was writing form validation logic in Ruby, working with ActiveRecord Migrations and database tables, rake-ing my db, and testing our [...]

By: Jay Levitt

Jay Levitt — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:56:15 +0000

So we just discovered sort-of-a-design-flaw-not-exactly with sexy validations. The Rails 3 way to do a unique validation is:

validates :first_name, :uniqueness => true

But this induces a common error:

validate :first_name, :uniqueness => true

And that mistake is *perfectly legal code that runs without error*. It means “Treat the method `first_name` as my validator function”. The :uniqueness => true gets ignored, because it’s an options hash that doesn’t contain any options we care about. first_name will always be an existing method; it’s the first_name field on your model! And that doesn’t add anything to `errors`, so the validation always succeeds.

Unfortunately, I can’t think of a way around it without deprecating and renaming either validate (perhaps “validator”?) or validates. Jamie, what do you think? Our own team has decided that we will never use the “validate :method_name” syntax; instead, we’ll always use “def validate”, and our CI system will enforce the rule.

By: leonardofaria.net → Validações personalizadas no Rails 3

leonardofaria.net → Validações personalizadas no Rails 3 — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 23:08:20 +0000

[...] foi um exemplo de como resolvi meu problema. Existem outros posts sobre o assunto por aí, boa sorte! Posts relacionados:sitemap.xml no [...]

By: Jamie

Jamie — Thu, 05 May 2011 22:44:02 +0000

@Eric The lib folder is fine, just add a “require ‘my_validator’” to the top of the model files that use them.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 04 May 2011 21:39:41 +0000

Thanks for this post, Jamie!

Where do you put your validators? I’ve found some other pages saying that lib is the place for custom validators but (as I now see in a comment above), that’s not autoloaded.

I can get away with putting my validator in config/initializers, but I’d like to know if there’s a convention for files like these. Removing autoloading of the lib folder implies (to me) that this isn’t where the Rails community would expect such files

By: Validating URL/URI in Ruby on Rails 3 « Distance To Here

Validating URL/URI in Ruby on Rails 3 « Distance To Here — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:47:18 +0000

[...] was a bit outdated, so I put together an updated validator that takes advantage of the new “sexy validations” provided in Rails 3. And here it [...]