Add :use_include option to allow user to explicitly use `Range#include?` method in Ruby 1.9

In Ruby 1.9 we're currently use `Range#cover?` to fix the performance problem. However, there might be the case that you want to use `Range#include?` instead. This patch will give you that option.
This commit is contained in:
Prem Sichanugrist 2011-04-10 15:39:01 +08:00 committed by José Valim
parent 58594be680
commit f6540211b5
4 changed files with 37 additions and 14 deletions

View File

@ -16,8 +16,8 @@ module ActiveModel
def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
exclusions = options[:in].respond_to?(:call) ? options[:in].call(record) : options[:in]
if exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :exclusion, options.except(:in).merge!(:value => value))
if exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions, options[:use_include]), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :exclusion, options.except(:in, :use_include).merge!(:value => value))
end
rescue NoMethodError
raise ArgumentError, "Exclusion validation for :#{attribute} in #{record.class.name}: #{ERROR_MESSAGE}"
@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ module ActiveModel
# 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)
enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
def inclusion_method(enumerable, use_include = nil)
!use_include && enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
end
end
@ -45,9 +45,11 @@ module ActiveModel
#
# 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. 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>.
# 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)
# * <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+).

View File

@ -16,8 +16,8 @@ module ActiveModel
def validate_each(record, attribute, value)
exclusions = options[:in].respond_to?(:call) ? options[:in].call(record) : options[:in]
unless exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :inclusion, options.except(:in).merge!(:value => value))
unless exclusions.send(inclusion_method(exclusions, options[:use_include]), value)
record.errors.add(attribute, :inclusion, options.except(:in, :use_include).merge!(:value => value))
end
rescue NoMethodError
raise ArgumentError, "Exclusion validation for :#{attribute} in #{record.class.name}: #{ERROR_MESSAGE}"
@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ module ActiveModel
# 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)
enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
def inclusion_method(enumerable, use_include = nil)
!use_include && enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
end
end
@ -45,9 +45,11 @@ module ActiveModel
#
# Configuration options:
# * <tt>:in</tt> - An enumerable object of available items. 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>.
# 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)
# * <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+).

View File

@ -63,4 +63,14 @@ class ExclusionValidationTest < ActiveModel::TestCase
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

View File

@ -95,4 +95,13 @@ class InclusionValidationTest < ActiveModel::TestCase
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