I think it would be good to have these validations, although I also personally didn't need them yet. One use case I can think of is validating that a number isn't negative, which IMO is a very common requirement.
I would just suggest a slight modification to Jeremy's idea. As a person who graduated mathematics, it's unintuitive for me to think of a "greater than or equal" operator >= as "not less than". It's just that when I was reading these two, it took me some time to figure out what do they mean, even though I knew that they're either >= or <=. I would propose that instead of "validates_not_less_than" and "validates_not_greater_than", we have "validates_greater_or_equal" and "validates_less_or_equal". But I wouldn't be unhappy if the first one stays. Now it makes sense when I read it, it just didn't the first time. Janko -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
