Alpha Blue wrote: > Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: >> >> 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. >> > > The two fields serve independent, unique purposes, and they contain > different data. The only time I check for validation for exact data is > when the page being created calls a redirect to a controller - action. > In this case, I require the name and the controller to be exact for too > many reasons to explain or to go into this particular topic.
Then in this case, you're right, a validation makes sense. > > The point I was making is that you can't generalize a topic and correct > people on criteria you have no information about. You are making false > assumptions. If you saw all of my code you could make an informed > reply. And if you had explained the situation more fully in the first place, I would have been able to do that. :) > > Validation is a tricky topic and there are many reasons people create > custom validations. The point I was making is that it can be done and > to make sure you don't muddy up the place you put your custom > validators. I understand your point on putting it in a module. I > disagree Why do you disagree? > but in this case we can agree to disagree on the topic. But we shouldn't. If you have a good reason, I'd like to hear it. > > Thanks. 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.
