Rails - May 2011 - Consequences of overriding update_attribute to force validation?

I know the debate of whether this should validate has been rehashed
many times. My question is, what are the consequences of overriding
this method to force validation? Will this break fundamental things?
Will it break plugins? Is there a reason not to have a strict
validation option?

In my code I will never use this as I consider it a terribly broken
method, but some gems use it and in one case I was just burned.

I do not want invalid objects in my database under any circumstances,
since the rest of my code rationally depends on validations - e.g. I
don''t check for null associations when the association is validated to
be there.

For the uninitiated, update_attribute:

1) Does not ever validate the object, causing a massive hole in your
validation schemes. For instance, if a validation depends on anything
you update with update_attribute, that validation will not work.

2) Updates ALL fields if the object has been modified.  @user.email
''invalidemail''; @user.update_attribute(:state,
''registered''); will
always put an invalid email in your database.

3) Saves the object regardless of whether it''s been persisted. E.g.
User.new.update_attribute(:state, ''registered'') will always
save a new
user object, even if you have all kinds of validations to guarantee
associations and properties are present. This is likely to seriously
break your application if it happens.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

On Saturday, May 21, 2011 12:54:32 PM UTC-6, Alex N
wrote:
>
> I know the debate of whether this should validate has been rehashed 
> many times. My question is, what are the consequences of overriding 
> this method to force validation? Will this break fundamental things? 
> Will it break plugins? Is there a reason not to have a strict 
> validation option? 
>
> In my code I will never use this as I consider it a terribly broken 
> method, but some gems use it and in one case I was just burned. 
>
I can''t comment on whether overriding #update_attribute would
"break
fundamental things" or not. However...

I would consider the gem in your project that uses it broken and raise the 
use of this method within said gem with the gem author. For a gem to blindly 
use it does seem unsafe _unless_ such behavior is well-known and documented. 
If, for performance reasons, some gem wants to do unvalidated writes to the 
database, that''s find _if_ the gem provides copious
warning/documentation
and/or its own dual-API that corresponds to the rails validated/unvalidated 
DB access.

If I were you and I really wanted to monkey-patch #update_attribute to 
validate, I''d just create a test/feature branch of my project and try
it
out. If it doesn''t break anything (and performance is fine) then cool. 
Otherwise you then have the answer to your question.

Anyhow, that''s just my $0.02
 
>
> I do not want invalid objects in my database under any circumstances, 
> since the rest of my code rationally depends on validations - e.g. I 
> don''t check for null associations when the association is
validated to
> be there. 
>
> For the uninitiated, update_attribute: 
>
> 1) Does not ever validate the object, causing a massive hole in your 
> validation schemes. For instance, if a validation depends on anything 
> you update with update_attribute, that validation will not work. 
>
> 2) Updates ALL fields if the object has been modified.  @user.email = 
> ''invalidemail''; @user.update_attribute(:state,
''registered''); will
> always put an invalid email in your database. 
>
> 3) Saves the object regardless of whether it''s been persisted.
E.g.
> User.new.update_attribute(:state, ''registered'') will
always save a new
> user object, even if you have all kinds of validations to guarantee 
> associations and properties are present. This is likely to seriously 
> break your application if it happens. 
>
>
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.