Hey, On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 15:22 +0100, Xavier Noria wrote: > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Rainer Frey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > But this thread seems to suggest one should simply validate the > > association attribute instead. Is that not sufficient then? > > You can't still be sure the association is valid, because the > associated object is cached if previously fetched, and the FK can be > changed directly:
This does work 'properly' on edge, due to the stale-checking mechanism.
I just tried it. Voila:
$ rails c
Loading development environment (Rails 3.1.0.beta)
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :001 > post = Post.create
=> #<Post id: 1>
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :002 > comment = post.comments.create
=> #<Comment id: 1, post_id: 1>
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :003 > comment.post_id = -1
=> -1
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :004 > comment.save
=> false
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :005 > comment.errors
=> {:post=>["can't be blank"]}
ruby-1.9.2-p136 :006 > comment.post
=> nil
Jon
--
http://jonathanleighton.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
