:greater_than_or_equal_to in validates_numericality_of only partially working in rails 3.1

Question

We are using the following to check if stock_qty (an integer or a float. Could be zero but not nil) is greater or equal to zero:

validates_numericality_of :stock_qty, :greater_than_or_equal_to => 0
validates_numericality_of :stock_qty, :less_than_or_equal_to => :in_qty, :if => Proc.new { |part| !part.in_qty.nil? }

:in_qty is a column in part model. This validation should allow positive or 0 for :stock_qty. The problem is that the rspec failed if :stock_qty is assigned zero. I noticed that :less_than_or_equal_to only allowed less_than and did not allow equal_to. Is there a way to validate the >= or <= in rails 3.1? Or what may go wrong with our validation code above. Thanks so much.

Braw

The code above seems all right... – Braw

Answer 1

try adding :only_integer => true like so:

validates_numericality_of :stock_qty, :only_integer => true, :greater_than_or_equal_to => 0

EDIT

if this needs to pass when stock_qty is nil or zero you need to change your code to this:

validates_numericality_of :stock_qty, :allow_nil => true, :greater_than_or_equal_to => 0
validates_numericality_of :stock_qty, :allow_nil => true, :less_than_or_equal_to => :in_qty, :if => Proc.new { |part| !part.in_qty.nil? }

Unfriended

Just added :stock_qty could be either integer or float. Thanks. – Braw

:only_integer => true did not change the rspec result. – Braw

Does this test need to pass if stock_qty is nil or zero? – Unfriended

stock_qty could be zero, but not nil. – Braw

Answer 2

validates :stock_qty, :numericality => { :only_integer => true, :greater_than_or_equal_to => 0 }

it works in my 3.1 app, in my case I have price, and when I update or add the product wthout price I got the "it's not a number" error, or something like that, but I can put a 0 in price column and it updates just fine. hope this helps.

:greater_than_or_equal_to – Specifies the value must be greater than or equal to the supplied value. The default error message for this option is “must be greater than or equal to %{count}”.

http://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_validations_callbacks.html

Blackandblue

Tried exactly the same using validates, rspec still failed with stock_qty == 0. Thanks. – Braw

However in rails console, it is OK to save a record with 0 stock_qty. It seems that rspec failed but actual model passed. Strange! – Braw

Answer 3

Also you could believe that there were 0 while there were nil. nil won't pass this checking.

Hoagy

Did you mean zero and nil are treated the same in the validation? – Braw

No, quite the opposite: you could write something like Model1.new.valid? and got false while stock_qty was nil. That's the only explanation that comes in mind (because I hope you didn't make another validation for you model that fails an you forgot about it). – Hoagy

Answer 4

For Rails > 6.1.0

class User < ApplicationRecord
 validates :age, numericality: { greater_than_or_equal_to: 18, less_than_or_equal_to: 65 }
end

I find the answer in this link

I hope it was easy and clear

Clinquant