Ruby Buzz Forum - Back to Rails

Articles |
News |
Weblogs |
Books |
Forums

Artima Forums | Articles | Weblogs | Java Answers | News

Sponsored Link •

Ruby Buzz Forum
Back to Rails

0 replies on 1 page.

Welcome Guest
Sign In

Back to Topic List

Reply to this Topic

Search Forum

Threaded View


Previous Topic		Next Topic

Flat View: This topic has 0 replies on 1 page

Daniel Berger

Posts: 1383
Nickname: djberg96
Registered: Sep, 2004

Daniel Berger is a Ruby Programmer who also dabbles in C and Perl

Back to Rails

Posted: Oct 20, 2009 2:40 PM

This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Ruby Buzz by Daniel Berger.
Original Post: Back to Rails Feed Title: Testing 1,2,3... Feed URL: http://djberg96.livejournal.com/data/rss Feed Description: A blog on Ruby and other stuff.	Latest Ruby Buzz Posts Latest Ruby Buzz Posts by Daniel Berger Latest Posts From Testing 1,2,3...

So, I'm doing RoR work again, and I'm hitting those annoying little issues that bugged me the first time around.

Today, it's the fact that I have to setup separate validations to handle nils/blanks. IMO I should be able to do this:

validates_numericality_of :elevation, :allow_nil => false

Now, this works. It validates that elevation is a number and it doesn't allow nulls. The problem is that, in the case of a null, it still sets the error message to "not a number". That's not what I want. I want "can't be blank". And I *only* want that error message. To get that effect I have to setup two separate validations, and add a conditional to the second one.

validates_presence_of :elevation

validates_numericality_of :elevation,
  :unless => Proc.new{ |site| site.elevation.blank? }

What a hassle.

Read: Back to Rails

Previous Topic

Next Topic


	Web Artima.com