Alternative syntax (suggestion) about mini_record HOT 6 CLOSED

You could even use field as a wrapper around your current solution probably.

def self.field(name, options = {})
  table_definition.send(options.delete(:type), name, options)
end

Something like that would probably work out of the box, since you pass the type in through :type => :string|:text|:integer|:date|etc.

from mini_record.

I just tested it and it works.

def self.field(name, options = {})
  table_definition.send(options.delete(:type) || :string, name, options)
end

Small adjustment options.delete(:type) || :string to define to :string type if no type is set.

Of course, this doesn't apply any :index => true functionality, but simply wraps around the current functionality, acting as an alternative DSL/syntax.

from mini_record.

Added! Let's me know what do you think about.

from mini_record.

Nice, good syntax improvement. Now reminds me of mongoid or datamapper a lot more.

from mini_record.

Very nice improvement. I like single method invocations more (key :attribute, options rather than col.string :attribute) and adding the hash of options at the end makes it very flexible since you can pass in more than simply what ActiveRecord's migration engine is capable of accepting, like MiniRecord's options for indexes.

Also like how you have both :type and :as since :type in my eyes is more for defining the "data type" and :as feels more for adding references/association columns, although they are the same thing, it makes for nicer DSL reading in the model again.

Can't wait to use this DSL along with PostgreSQL in my next project.

Thanks!

from mini_record.

Very cool! Is this slated for an upcoming release?

from mini_record.