> Agreed, the setter method should have a different name than the > existing "tasks=" method. The behavior is different enough to warrant > its own method. Otherwise it will just be confusing on the > implementation side and the API side. Is there any good reason for > using the same setter method?
The reason I had used the association setter is because in the case of a has_one association things like fields_for would work out of the box and I only needed to create a special fields_for for a has_many association. Eloy --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
