It won't be hard at all, in fact it _was_ this way in the beginning. However, after much discussion it was decided that the current way is the better way and although it takes a bit more typing, I agree with the decision.
Example: “:attributes => true” doesn't say anything about the association, which is what has_many (and the other macros) are about. Now that example could be fixed easily, however it gets worse with the options for NestedAttributes. “:reject_if => …” has nothing to do with the association at all. There were some other minor issues as wel iirc, you can search the ML and LH for that. To conclude; I feel nothing for changing this, and especially not when the core team is trying to to get out the must have patches. Cheers, Eloy On Mar 12, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Stevie D wrote: > > How hard would it be to patch a naming convention in nested > attributes? > > I'd be interested in patching myself, though my testing skills > probably should not be trusted. > > This is basically what I'd like to see: > > http://pastie.textmate.org/pastes/413750 > > Anyone else think this would be a marked improvement? > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
