[LRUG] Field definitions in AR models

[Klaus Hebsgaard]

I use this gem on a project:
https://github.com/ctran/annotate_models

It annotates the model with comments.

Don't know if that is what you are after?

Med Venlig hilsen / Best regards

Klaus Hebsgaard

Website: http://www.hebsgaard.dk
Blog: *http://www.khebbie.dk <http://www.khebbie.dk>*
LinkedIIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/klaushebsgaard
Github: https://github.com/khebbie

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Thomas Buckley-Houston <tom at tombh.co.uk>
wrote:

> Thanks for the replies.
>
> I think Tim Diggins most gets what I'm on about, thanks :)
>
> My problem with poking around the console is that it's counter to the
> MVC philosophy of using the Model to describe your domain. Code *as*
> documentation and all that. In pretty much every other MVC framework
> and ORM I've come across, fields are described in the model. My
> question is really curiosity as to why this is? Is AR's fieldless
> models a known pattern? Or is there a historical reason in AR's
> development for it?
>
> PS Nice to see a fellow Buckley, Kerry, we're probably cousins thrice
> removed or something.
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> Archives: http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org
> Manage your subscription: http://lists.lrug.org/options.cgi/chat-lrug.org
> List info: http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20150218/a77141a3/attachment-0003.html>