LiveCode Forums.

Please implement a robust data validation feature set into Revolution.

Why? To maintain consistent and accurate data entry.

Consider the very simple scenario of requiring a user to enter data into a field. This data may be part of a primary key in a database and which must not be empty. So, why waste time manually coding a data entry validation script -- for each entry field -- when one can just set an object's "required" property?

Data validation should deal with text, numbers, dates, and times. Range checking should be a part of the feature set: a number (or date or time) should not fall out of a given range.

The rev platform is a general-purpose development tool, not a dedicated database front-end builder. That being said, validation would be nice; but some user interfaces prefer to do the validation step once, when the user clicks the 'OK' button, and other environments call for immediate validation preventing the user from leaving the field.
Also, you don't need to copy+paste the validation code into every single field: you can use behaviors to centralize logic.

Jan Schenkel.

FWIW, I've started a new project at the Rev Interoperability Group to provide an open-source field validation behavior:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/revInterop/

FourthWorld wrote:FWIW, I've started a new project at the Rev Interoperability Group to provide an open-source field validation behavior:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/revInterop/

Now I can't get rich by creating my own and charging $99.

Janschenkel wrote:...Also, you don't need to copy+paste the validation code into every single field: you can use behaviors to centralize logic.

Jan Schenkel.

I knew there must be a way. Thank you.

I found the information in the online Dictionary and tried the behaviors lessons. Very nice.

(Programming in Revolution is weird.)

redpill wrote:

FourthWorld wrote:FWIW, I've started a new project at the Rev Interoperability Group to provide an open-source field validation behavior:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/revInterop/

Now I can't get rich by creating my own and charging $99.

That's one of the downsides to Rev's continued growth: the community is awash in code inflation, lowering the value of many individual contributions while increasing the number of those contributions. Beats the alternative, though: a Rev languishing unloved.

In fact, that's one of the reasons I like to provide timely notice for any open source projects I work on, helping to avoid situations where toolmakers invest a lot of time into something that's being replicated elsewhere.