Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Dec 13 15:58
    rokhimin starred dry-rb/dry-matcher
  • Dec 13 08:53
    flash-gordon labeled #376
  • Dec 13 08:44
    solnic commented #376
  • Dec 12 21:34
    flash-gordon commented #376
  • Dec 12 21:34
    flash-gordon labeled #376
  • Dec 12 21:34
    flash-gordon opened #376
  • Dec 12 19:32
    RyanLafferty starred dry-rb/dry-types
  • Dec 12 05:53
    technofreak starred dry-rb/dry-monads
  • Dec 12 00:14
    thekuwayama starred dry-rb/dry-monads
  • Dec 11 09:29
    blasterun starred dry-rb/dry-monads
  • Dec 11 08:34
    flash-gordon closed #115
  • Dec 11 08:34
    flash-gordon commented #115
  • Dec 11 08:31

    flash-gordon on v1.3.3

    (compare)

  • Dec 11 08:30

    flash-gordon on master

    Bump version to 1.3.3 (compare)

  • Dec 11 08:30

    flash-gordon on master

    Update CHANGELOG (compare)

  • Dec 10 23:46
    johnmaxwell commented #116
  • Dec 10 21:54

    flash-gordon on master

    Halt with mutable backtrace Ex… Merge pull request #116 from jo… (compare)

  • Dec 10 21:54
    flash-gordon closed #116
  • Dec 10 21:54
    flash-gordon commented #116
  • Dec 10 21:49
    johnmaxwell commented #116
Adam Davies
@adz

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….

Tim Riley
@timriley
@adz I’d write a predicate like unique_within_account?(account_id, user_name)
Adam Davies
@adz
Thanks… how would that look when called? I’m a little confused about that
Tim Riley
@timriley
lemme set something up to test :)
Adam Davies
@adz
Much appreciated !
(there’s more if click through)
Adam Davies
@adz
got it...
how would it look if “unique_within_account?” had a third param?
name.unique_within_account?(account_id)
-> ?
Tim Riley
@timriley
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?
Adam Davies
@adz
ah ok… yeah
trying different things and I think there are issues with docs
Tim Riley
@timriley
Sorry about that :grimacing:
Adam Davies
@adz
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)
Tim Riley
@timriley
well, it’s just a different way of running that predicate
.filled(prdicate_name?: :args_go_here)
Adam Davies
@adz
i understand it changes to “filled? & …"
Tim Riley
@timriley
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
Adam Davies
@adz
In examples above I’m referring to docs here http://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-validation/comparison-with-activemodel/
Tim Riley
@timriley
yeah. that’s passing static values as predicate args
Adam Davies
@adz
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])

Tim Riley
@timriley
yes
they’re splatted
Adam Davies
@adz
so it doesn’t make sense in the example, right?
Tim Riley
@timriley
no :(
Adam Davies
@adz

required(:email).filled(scoped_unique?: :email, scope?: { active: true })

should be

required(:email).filled(scoped_unique?: [:email, { active: true }])

Tim Riley
@timriley
yeah
Adam Davies
@adz
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?
Adam Davies
@adz

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

Tim Riley
@timriley
@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.
Adam Davies
@adz
ok
Adam Davies
@adz
Anyone use dry pipeline? Seems like dry transaction supersedes it with similar functionality
Tim Riley
@timriley
Yeah, dry-pipeline never really went anywhere
rom has something like it built internally for function composition but it’s not separate