Rails - Mar 2006 - DB data type enforcement in Active Record

I have a question about how ActiveRecord handles data types.

When I enter text in a text_field (meaning, a field in the GUI) which 
belongs to a numeric field in the database, Active Record automaticly 
converts it to 0, because that''s what the to_f/to_i method of a string 
does. Is it also possible to have Active Record enforce the types, so 
that when you enter text for a numeric field, it generates an exception? 
A solution which doesn''t involve specifing a method in each model to 
manually check for types would be nice...

Thanks in advance.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On 03/03/06 17:14 +0100, Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> I have a question about how ActiveRecord handles data types.
> 
> When I enter text in a text_field (meaning, a field in the GUI) which 
> belongs to a numeric field in the database, Active Record automaticly 
> converts it to 0, because that''s what the to_f/to_i method of a
string
> does. Is it also possible to have Active Record enforce the types, so 
> that when you enter text for a numeric field, it generates an exception? 
> A solution which doesn''t involve specifing a method in each model
to
> manually check for types would be nice...
> 
What you''re looking for is present with Validations. See
validates_numericality_of.

Regards,
Jason

Jason Stewart wrote:
> What you''re looking for is present with Validations. See
> validates_numericality_of.
Haha, of course. I wanted to use this for my unit tests as well, 
therefore was looking for a way to get an exception. But I can test 
"assert ! object.save", since it isn''t saved when it
doesn''t match the
validation.

On a sidenote, is there a good way to let AJAX forms pick up on 
validation? Currently, it just does nothing, it fails silently.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> But I can test 
> "assert ! object.save", since it isn''t saved when it
doesn''t match the
> validation.
Or just "assert object.valid?"...

-- 
Alex

Alex Young wrote:
> Or just "assert object.valid?"...
Indeed, that''s cleaner.


-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.