On Apr 2, 11:06 pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > You can also do > > db.table.field1.requires=IS_NULL_OR(IS_IPV4()) > db.table.field2.requires=IS_NULL_OR(IS_IPV4()) > > def at_least_one(form): > if not form.vars.field1 and not form.vars.field2: > form.errors.field2='cannot be empty if field1 is empty' > form.errors.field1='cannot be empty if field2 is empty' > > if form.accepts(request.vars,session,onvalidation=at_least_one): .... > > In this case it is general, the call is gone inside accept, you do not > need dbio=False and you can associate the errors to any field you > want. The check is performed on values that have already been > filtered by normal validation. > onvalidation is executed after regular validation, but before dbio. If > onvalidation sets an error, no dbio is performed, and accepts returns > false.
I like this best - it is as "compact" as your first suggestion, but more readable, clear - which I like. It is also less "cluttered" than what I suggested - more modular. I think Jonathan's question / request is actually a very good example of when "onvalidation" is useful, clean, general. Johathan - really, really good question! ;-) - Yarko > > This is not in the book because we introduced sometime in fall 2009. > > massimo > > On Apr 2, 10:10 pm, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Apr 2, 2010, at 8:05 PM, mdipierro wrote: > > > > Yes. No one solution is obviously better. It is good to have some > > > options. > > > Yarko's approach allows for a more general error message, at the expense of > > not associating it with a particular input field. In my case, I think I see > > a way of phrasing the error messages so that it works OK with Massimo's > > approach. > > > > Massimo > > > > On Apr 2, 8:45 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > >> On Apr 2, 7:14 pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> db.table.field1.requires=IS_NULL_OR(IS_IPV4()) > > >>> db.table.field2.requires=IS_NULL_OR(IS_IPV4()) if request.vars.field1 > > >>> else IS_IPV4() > > > >> Thank you for this, Massimo - this is a nice, compact idiom for using > > >> existing validators; I hadn't considered (don't know why not - it's > > >> obvious looking at it) this idiom in assigning to a "requires" field. > > > >> My approach is more general - ANY situation where you want to do some > > >> combinatorial logic, or external checking: form.accepts( ..., > > >> dbio=False)... > > > >> Good question, Jonathan! :-) > > > >> - Yarko > > > >>> On Apr 2, 10:32 am, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>>> I think I've seen an answer to this one, but I can't find it. > > > >>>> I've got a form with two Field's, both IS_IPV4(). The validation I'm > > >>>> after is that one or both must be present; the only invalid case is > > >>>> both of them null. > > > >>>> How do I write that? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" 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/web2py?hl=en.
