Has anyone considered throwing a symbol as opposed to raising an exception when a save fails? Exceptions are heavy beasts in ruby and perhaps using the throw-catch mechanism would be much more lightweight.
(proposed as an option for consideration) === Adam French afrench on irc On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:48 PM, Alex Neth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't know what other issue and that's the point. If a > RecordInvalid exception is thrown, I know that there is a validation > error and that I want to check user.errors and probably display the > form again. I don't want to assume that is the case just because the > save failed. > > That is unless the contract of the save method says "returns false > means there was a validation error and user.errors contains the > details." Right now the contract just says that false means the save > failed. The point is I don't want to have to think "is there some > other cause of returning false?" > > I gave the example of a PermissionsError, if permissions were > integrated into the model. In that case it would still return false > (following the current pattern) and I would have to check user.valid? > and then check user.can_save? or something. Even calling user.valid? > is not 100% accurate here, since validation will be rerun and perhaps > the state has changed from passage of time, insertion of new records, > etc. I want the validation error bubbled up when it happens. > Anything else is not accurate. > > > > On Nov 26, 8:27 pm, Jon Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think he means that RecordInvalid is _one_ of the exceptions that >> might be raised. Another for the case of a save could be >> DuplicateRecord. >> >> Jon >> >> On Nov 26, 7:51 pm, Michael Klishin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > On 26.11.2008, at 12:25, Alex Neth wrote: >> >> > > Right now I can stop execution with an "if user.save," but I need to >> > > probe the object for the reason - is it invalid? is there some other >> > > issue? >> >> > What other issues can it be? If RecordInvalid-like exceptions would be >> > raised, don't you face the same problem? >> >> > MK >> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
