Kind of funny ... we were writing almost in parallel :)
On Sep 21, 9:30 pm, Tim Perrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WOW! Marius this is so fricking sweet. well done, awesome stuff
indeed!
Functionally, I think this would serve as an excellent place to start
for providing validation in
Great minds Marius - you sent your mail at 19:29, and mine at 19:30!
What do you think on my comments above?
Cheers, Tim
On 21 Sep 2008, at 19:29, Marius wrote:
Guys please try running the application above, take a look on the code
and have feedback. Is it a sufficient paradigm (from server
I thought I replied :)
On Sep 21, 9:37 pm, Tim Perrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great minds Marius - you sent your mail at 19:29, and mine at 19:30!
What do you think on my comments above?
Cheers, Tim
On 21 Sep 2008, at 19:29, Marius wrote:
Guys please try running the application
That would be sweet ! ... anything particular in mind? ... things like
email, phone number validation etc?
Totally - nothing crazy to begin with, perhaps with some way of
passing a regex or whatever to ward off boiler plate code thats
repeated by lift users. Conceptually, I think the ones
On Sep 21, 9:48 pm, Tim Perrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be sweet ! ... anything particular in mind? ... things like
email, phone number validation etc?
Totally - nothing crazy to begin with, perhaps with some way of
passing a regex or whatever to ward off boiler plate code
Sorry I should have been clearer... Of course, I wouldnt work it
straight into master :-)
I'll make a branch or fork then we'll go from there
Cheers Marius, this is great work
Tim
On Sep 21, 7:57 pm, Marius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 21, 9:48 pm, Tim Perrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Perrett wrote:
IMHO the form validation framework should work independently from any
persistence related stuff ...
+1
Right. The Record/Field stuff is not about persistence... it's about
richer representation of data than String/Int/Long/Date. It's about the
stuff that