Following on from experimenting with dry-validations…
How would you verify uniqueness when scoped to another record?
Say “account” has many “users”, and I want users.name to be unqiue within an account….
@adz I’d write a predicate like
unique_within_account?(account_id, user_name)
Thanks… how would that look when called? I’m a little confused about that
lemme set something up to test :)
Much appreciated !
@adz here you go :) https://gist.github.com/timriley/3fe04be6cffc0f39ef402b3c6f5547a4
(there’s more if click through)
got it...
how would it look if “unique_within_account?” had a third param?
name.unique_within_account?(account_id)
-> ?
the “value under test” is always the last param for custom predicates
so it’d be
def unique_within?(first, second, the_value)
and fo
name.unique_within?(“foo”, “bar”), first would be ”foo”, second would be ”bar”
is that what you’re after?
ah ok… yeah
trying different things and I think there are issues with docs
Sorry about that :grimacing:
it shows like
required(:email).filled(scoped_unique?: :email, scope?: { active: true })
… i guess . does it change when under the ‘filled’?
defined inside configure:
def scoped_unique?(attr_name, scope, value)
well, it’s just a different way of running that predicate
.filled(prdicate_name?: :args_go_here)
i understand it changes to “filled? & …"
lemme try
I don’t think you can do that short-hand use of the predicates if you’re depending on another input value
the high-level rules work because they only run if the input values they require have passed any other validations
in that way they’re “safe”
and e.g. our predicate method can rely on its args being a certain type
In examples above I’m referring to docs here http://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-validation/comparison-with-activemodel/
yeah. that’s passing static values as predicate args
Ok i get that… but i read it as ‘scope?’ being a diff predicate
so… if there are two args`.filled(prdicate_name?: :args_go_here)
would it be:
`.filled(prdicate_name?: [:arg1, :arg2])
yes
they’re splatted
so it doesn’t make sense in the example, right?
no :(
required(:email).filled(scoped_unique?: :email, scope?: { active: true })
should be
required(:email).filled(scoped_unique?: [:email, { active: true }])
yeah
its hard when you don’t know how the DSL is structured… i’m kind of inferring from examples
getting clearer
Ok — @timriley i updated my PR to the docs to correct
dry-rb/dry-rb.org#138 let me know if that is correct now?
One more thing — is it possible to infer the key of the predicate being tested?
that “required(:email).filled(unique?: :email)” has to repeat the ‘email’ key as an arg
@adz AFAIK the predicates don’t know which key they’re being used on, no
I thought there might’ve been a GH issue about this, but I can’t find it.
ok
Anyone use dry pipeline? Seems like dry transaction supersedes it with similar functionality
Yeah, dry-pipeline never really went anywhere
rom has something like it built internally for function composition but it’s not separate
I feel the urge to chain functions and seems to fit
yeah, I use dry-monads and return monads to do that
maybe the pipeline thing is useful in other kinds of cases
Doing elm has corrupted me such that I'm uncomfortable with mutations :0
:)
This message was deleted
This message was deleted
First time doing rails for
A year or so
... Dry stuff feels very nice :smiley:
Good to hear! Still a way to go, but we’re getting there :)
how do I require a field only if the value of another field is equals to X ?
hey there, a ruby question, how do we change namespace scope..
I remember you did something like
something < self
endthen you could define without saying def self.method
class < self
oww yes, can I also use it to change the namespace in general
for example in order to avoid using
Module::Class somewhere
becouse now that I think of it thats not what I wanted...
Im not sure what you want to do
ok, let me get into more detail
I have the following
module Ranking
class Ranking
# bla bla bla stuff
def get_score(user)
Metrics::METRICS.reduce(0) do |points_total, (metric, points)|
points_total + metric.calculate(user, @scope) * points
end
end
end
endmodule Ranking
module Metrics
METRICS = {
Metrics::Messages => 30,
Metrics::Activity => 40,
......
}
end
end
what I want to avoid is having to say
Metrics::Xxxxxx in the METRICS constant
I know I could just add "Metrics::" and the eval, but... I don't know seems like there should be a way to avoid that meta
it shouldnt be just:
METRICS == { Messages => 30 } ?
Well it could, but then the
Ranking class that is in a different naming scope would fail to find them
Hmmm... I guess I could restructure the order of the modules.. but.. owww I just want better namespace handling :'( :sob:
seems I can do this
metric = Object.const_get("Metrics").const_get(metric.to_s), hurts my eyes
Hmmm... thats interesting... turns out I'm a whiny prick and it worked all along like you mention @lastk.
I must have been doing something different earlier or was just ignorant.. sry
I must have been doing something different earlier or was just ignorant.. sry
haaha, np :)
@vasspilka pretty sure you can write that like:
Metrics.const_get(metric)