Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Revert "Add :use_include option to allow user to explicitly use `Rang…
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
…e#include?` method in Ruby 1.9"

Use :with => range.to_a instead.

This reverts commit f654021.
  • Loading branch information
josevalim committed Apr 11, 2011
1 parent b93199b commit 5bf3d46
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 4 changed files with 14 additions and 37 deletions.
16 changes: 7 additions & 9 deletions activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/exclusion.rb
Expand Up @@ -16,8 +16,8 @@ def check_validity!

def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
exclusions = options[:in].respond_to?(:call) ? options[:in].call(record) : options[:in]
if exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions, options[:use_include]), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :exclusion, options.except(:in, :use_include).merge!(:value => value))
if exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :exclusion, options.except(:in).merge!(:value => value))
end
rescue NoMethodError
raise ArgumentError, "Exclusion validation for :#{attribute} in #{record.class.name}: #{ERROR_MESSAGE}"
Expand All @@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
# In Ruby 1.9 <tt>Range#include?</tt> on non-numeric ranges checks all possible values in the
# range for equality, so it may be slow for large ranges. The new <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# uses the previous logic of comparing a value with the range endpoints.
def inclusion_method(enumerable, use_include = nil)
!use_include && enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
def inclusion_method(enumerable)
enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
end
end

Expand All @@ -45,11 +45,9 @@ module HelperMethods
#
# Configuration options:
# * <tt>:in</tt> - An enumerable object of items that the value shouldn't be part of.
# This can be supplied as a proc or lambda which returns an enumerable.
# * <tt>:use_include</tt> - If set to true and the enumerable in <tt>:in</tt> option is a range,
# it will explicitly use <tt>Range#include?</tt> to perform the test. Otherwise <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# will be used to perform the test for performance reason.
# (Range#cover? was backported in Active Support for 1.8.x)
# This can be supplied as a proc or lambda which returns an enumerable. If the enumerable
# is a range the test is performed with <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# (backported in Active Support for 1.8), otherwise with <tt>include?</tt>.
# * <tt>:message</tt> - Specifies a custom error message (default is: "is reserved").
# * <tt>:allow_nil</tt> - If set to true, skips this validation if the attribute is +nil+ (default is +false+).
# * <tt>:allow_blank</tt> - If set to true, skips this validation if the attribute is blank (default is +false+).
Expand Down
16 changes: 7 additions & 9 deletions activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/inclusion.rb
Expand Up @@ -16,8 +16,8 @@ def check_validity!

def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
exclusions = options[:in].respond_to?(:call) ? options[:in].call(record) : options[:in]
unless exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions, options[:use_include]), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :inclusion, options.except(:in, :use_include).merge!(:value => value))
unless exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :inclusion, options.except(:in).merge!(:value => value))
end
rescue NoMethodError
raise ArgumentError, "Exclusion validation for :#{attribute} in #{record.class.name}: #{ERROR_MESSAGE}"
Expand All @@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
# In Ruby 1.9 <tt>Range#include?</tt> on non-numeric ranges checks all possible values in the
# range for equality, so it may be slow for large ranges. The new <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# uses the previous logic of comparing a value with the range endpoints.
def inclusion_method(enumerable, use_include = nil)
!use_include && enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
def inclusion_method(enumerable)
enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
end
end

Expand All @@ -45,11 +45,9 @@ module HelperMethods
#
# Configuration options:
# * <tt>:in</tt> - An enumerable object of available items. This can be
# supplied as a proc or lambda which returns an enumerable.
# * <tt>:use_include</tt> - If set to true and the enumerable in <tt>:in</tt> option is a range,
# it will explicitly use <tt>Range#include?</tt> to perform the test. Otherwise <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# will be used to perform the test for performance reason.
# (Range#cover? was backported in Active Support for 1.8.x)
# supplied as a proc or lambda which returns an enumerable. If the enumerable
# is a range the test is performed with <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
# (backported in Active Support for 1.8), otherwise with <tt>include?</tt>.
# * <tt>:message</tt> - Specifies a custom error message (default is: "is not included in the list").
# * <tt>:allow_nil</tt> - If set to true, skips this validation if the attribute is +nil+ (default is +false+).
# * <tt>:allow_blank</tt> - If set to true, skips this validation if the attribute is blank (default is +false+).
Expand Down
10 changes: 0 additions & 10 deletions activemodel/test/cases/validations/exclusion_validation_test.rb
Expand Up @@ -63,14 +63,4 @@ def test_validates_exclustion_with_invalid_lambda_return
p.author_name = "sikachu"
assert_raise(ArgumentError){ p.valid? }
end

def test_validates_inclusion_with_explicit_include
range = (1..100)
Topic.validates_exclusion_of :title, :in => range, :use_include => true
range.expects(:include?).returns(false)

t = Topic.new
t.title = 102
assert t.valid?
end
end
Expand Up @@ -95,13 +95,4 @@ def test_validates_inclustion_with_invalid_lambda_return
p.author_name = "sikachu"
assert_raise(ArgumentError){ p.valid? }
end

def test_validates_inclusion_with_explicit_include
range = (1..100)
Topic.validates_inclusion_of :title, :in => range, :use_include => true

t = Topic.new
t.title = 42
assert t.valid?
end
end

0 comments on commit 5bf3d46

Please sign in to comment.