Added the possibility to define custom attributes's names on models #213
Conversation
|
This would be extremely useful. |
| @@ -517,6 +524,7 @@ public function validate(array $rules = array(), array $customMessages = array() | |||
| $success = true; | |||
| } else { | |||
| $customMessages = (empty($customMessages))? static::$customMessages : $customMessages; | |||
| $customAttributes = (empty($customAttributes))? static::$customAttributes : $customAttributes; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where's this variable coming from? $customMessages is an argument but the new one is not. Please include it in the method signatures if it makes sense (I guess it does although I'm no Laravel expert) or simply remove this check altogether and use static::$customAttributes directly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My mistake. $customAttributes parameter included!
Added ``$customAttributes`` on ``Ardent::validate()`` signature.
|
+1 |
|
+1 |
|
+1 |
|
+1 |
|
@igorsantos07 bump If the PR removes/discards the README.md file changes, then I think this can be safely merged? |
|
Can be merged now |
|
Sorry for taking so long. I've said something "apologising" at #275. I'm not sure if this would be the best approach but I doesn't seem bad either. I guess you all are better on verifying this than myself, for not using Laravel currently, neither the project. Thanks @ricardoriogo for the code and @sisou for the tip! |
Added the possibility to define custom attributes's names on models
|
For those interested, I have no time to organize a new release now, but you can use the commit as a means of locking a version. I guess you should define the version as |
Added the possibility to define the last argument of Illuminate\Validation\Validator constructor method.