On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:05 AM, marius d. marius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 29, 4:32 pm, Oliver Lambert olambo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Marius,
To try and answer your question, I had to go and look at the Record code
in
more detail. I hadn't recently written the Binder Validator, so
I'm aware of S.error and my ValidationError uses it when I'm ready to show
errors. I've briefly looked at the ValidationFunction and the thing I might
stumble on is the errorType which I rely on.
I may be able to refactor the code to use List[FieldError] as I don't think
I rely on errorType at
I see ... still the question remains. What are we going to do with two
validators? I'd like to understand the principles of your addition
(... I know I should have dig into the code but I don't have much time
now).
I'd like to understand as I said previously if we have redundant
validators or
Hi Marius,
To try and answer your question, I had to go and look at the Record code in
more detail. I hadn't recently written the Binder Validator, so it wasn't
designed to be
complementary to anything else (however, some of the naming and methodology
is very
similar in both sets of code).
What I
One thing I've been thinking about is optionally extending the Validator
Functions to also emit JavaScript that would perform the validation in the
browser... that would provide a seamless way to do client-side validation
for validators (e.g., min len, max len, regex) that only rely on client-side
That would be very cool
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:37 PM, David Pollak
feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing I've been thinking about is optionally extending the Validator
Functions to also emit JavaScript that would perform the validation in the
browser... that would provide a
