On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:03 PM, Crocodile wrote:
> It's almost always the case that you need to provide a meaningful feedback
> about what exactly went wrong, rather then to just say "Failed!" While
> simplicity is nice and you cannot overrate value of validation, this whole
> thing is pretty mu
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:03 PM, Crocodile wrote:
> It's almost always the case that you need to provide a meaningful feedback
> about what exactly went wrong, rather then to just say "Failed!" While
> simplicity is nice and you cannot overrate value of validation, this whole
> thing is pretty mu
It's almost always the case that you need to provide a meaningful feedback
about what exactly went wrong, rather then to just say "Failed!" While
simplicity is nice and you cannot overrate value of validation, this whole
thing is pretty much useless to me personally without this ability. Also, I
do
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I spent a little time for a new input validation module. It's not totally
> new module, but is based on Filter module's validation filter improvement
> RFC in many ways. [1]
>
> As all of us knew already, input validation is the mo
