Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Jan 22 22:09

    solnic on v0.14.1

    (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:09

    solnic on master

    Bump dry-system to 0.14.1 (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:07

    solnic on master

    Use Kernel.require explicitly … (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:06

    solnic on use-kernel-require

    Use Kernel.require explicitly … (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:04

    dry-bot on master

    [devtools] update changelog.yml… [devtools] sync configs (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:04

    solnic on use-kernel-require

    (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:03

    solnic on master

    Use Kernel.require to avoid iss… Merge pull request #136 from dr… (compare)

  • Jan 22 22:03
    solnic closed #136
  • Jan 22 22:00
    solnic opened #136
  • Jan 22 21:59

    solnic on use-kernel-require

    Use Kernel.require to avoid iss… (compare)

  • Jan 21 13:13

    solnic on v0.14.0

    (compare)

  • Jan 21 13:10

    dry-bot on master

    [devtools] sync configs (compare)

  • Jan 21 13:09

    solnic on master

    Bump dry-system to 0.14.0 (compare)

  • Jan 21 13:08

    solnic on master

    Update changelog.yml (compare)

  • Jan 21 10:31

    solnic on docsite-0.15

    (compare)

  • Jan 21 10:31

    solnic on docsite-1.0

    (compare)

  • Jan 21 10:17
    Travis dry-rb/dry-view (master) errored (706)
  • Jan 21 10:14
    jchapron starred dry-rb/dry-types
  • Jan 21 10:13

    dry-bot on master

    [devtools] sync configs (compare)

  • Jan 21 10:13

    dry-bot on master

    [devtools] sync configs (compare)

Piotr Solnica
@solnic
not entirely sure how the dsl will look though
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
ah ok, that would be very useful =)
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
I know, it’s high on my list
it’s one of the many personal pet peeves I’ve got with AM::V that I want to fix in dry-v
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
already love this => MyFormValidator.new.messages(params).params
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
hah yeah, coerced params are sweet
and safe, ootb
I’ll add structure validation too, soon
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
When you can use your own types and coercions this will be event sweeter =)
when/if
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
you can
no public API for that yet though, but it’s possible
it’s only a matter of registering your type within dry-data and defining your predicate
…and extending type compiler, but we can collapse those 3 steps into a single method call
and extending type compiler means adding your_predicate => your_type mapping :joy:
sounded so serious when I wrote it :D
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
oh? you're spoiling us <3
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
dry-data is extendible, so is dry-validation
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
I don't really like the globalness of Dry::Data right now
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
yeah, I will probably add a way of setting your own container
I also thought about having a way to define types under constants, so it feels more natural to define things like attribute :foo, MyTypes::Something::Foo
but I dunno, we’ll see
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
cool =)
feels like you have a plan for everything =P
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
I certainly don’t, but I’ve thought about a ton things, I gotta say :)
@kwando ^^ :)
@AMHOL ^^
lemme know if you have some dsl ideas for that
we definitely need a way to explicitly name a group, which will be needed for messages, although this could default to concatenation of rule names within a group
eventually this will be nestable too, ie a group depending on another group etc
it should also be possible to create a group from rules that are applied to values from different levels of nesting
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
if you think that’s crazy, I can assure you this kind of requirements exist :joy: I’ve got a ton of this stuff in my current client project
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
@solnic I don't get what group is doing differently? Is it that it's calling an existing predicate with the values from two keys?
Group seems a bit of a strange name for that
Hannes Nevalainen
@kwando
I not sure about the name, but the functionality :thumbsup:
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL it groups rules so...
I mean I’m open to other names of course
the rule is called Rule::Group and is identified as :group because it is a…group :)
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Just looks like an eql predicate in the spec
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
it accepts multiple args as input, so it’s different
we could just use rule(eql?: [:pass, :confirm]) maybe
Tim Riley
@timriley
That one reads better to me.
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
cool, I think I like it more
Tim Riley
@timriley
If I saw the word “group” used in a validation schema, I’d expect it to allow a disparate set of predicates (on multiple keys, even) that would all need to pass together, or something.
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Yeah, rule works nicely IMO, much less confusing
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
Class.new(Dry::Validation::Schema) do
  confirmation(:password)
end
cannot be more concise than this :joy:
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
:)
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL btw, uniqueness validation backed by a db should be very simple to achieve now