Alpha Blue wrote: > Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: >> Bad example. The only time you should ever need to do this is in the >> case already covered by validates_confirmation_of. If you have two >> fields in the DB that should always be identical, then remove one of >> them. >> > > I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. In the case my example, I referred > to an example of virtual pages versus hard controller pages. In the > case of matching fields, if a controller redirect occurs to a statically > created page, I want the name field and the controller field to be exact > because of meta data creation in quite a few areas. However, in the > case of a virtually created (dynamic) page where redirects are not > occurring, the controller field is not used and the name field is. > Therefore, you would not use a controller field for a virtually created > page.
What do you mean by "hard controller pages"? If I understand correctly, I think you are making an artificial distinction that is impeding your design decisions. > So, no, you would not destroy another field that serves a > completely different and unique purpose. If the two fields serve independent, unique purposes, then they will contain different data some of the time. If they can never, ever contain different data, then they are ipso facto not independent and should be merged. It's that simple. > > It's very easy to provide a simple no to a question but before you do, > you should understand what you are saying no to. I do. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en.
