a while back i mentioned it in #datamapper and they didn't want to change the semantics of #errors which is reasonable.
On Aug 16, 7:47 pm, arbales <[email protected]> wrote: > why not put those relationship errors into obj.errors. If it's not > saving, it has an error, sort of illogical to have to look elsewhere > (IMHO) > > arb > > On Aug 16, 11:31 am, franco <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > is there a general case way to find out if a resource's relationship > > is failing validation? > > > i often find myself doing something like this: > > > obj.save => false > > obj.valid? => true > > > obj.foo.save => false > > obj.foo.valid? => true > > > obj.foo.bar.save => false > > obj.foo.bar.valid? => false > > obj.foo.bar.errors => something useful > > > unless already implemented somewhere it would be nice to have > > something like > > > obj.save => false > > obj.valid? => true > > obj.relationship_errors => array all objects in the relationship graph > > that have valid? == false -- 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.
