3 ms·
As far as I can tell, they only modified the formatting used for lining up column options[0], not all formatting for the file. I hated that formatting anyways,
by ezekg 10y ago
As far as I can tell, they only modified the formatting used for lining up column options[0], not all formatting for the file. I hated that formatting anyways, due to the diffs it produced. I admit that I haven't tested a migration on 5.1 yet and am just looking at the commit log so maybe I'm wrong.
[0]: https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/25675 https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/25675
- 3pt14159 10y agoImagine wanting to quickly scan which attributes are required and which ones aren't. It used to be easy, find the "null" option with your eyes then scan downwards. Plus it just looks more messy now.
- ezekg 10y agoSure, but I still wasn't a fan of the diffs that it produced—and like poorman said, if you really need that then use the annotate gem which lets you check the model file for that info instead of digging through a giant schema file.
- 3pt14159 10y agoNot what I want. No syntax highlighting, and annoying when I don't need it. Plus I always read the migration file for the db/schema diff anyway. Also, sometimes I want one place to quickly hop around in to remind myself how one area of the codebase snaps together. I never intentionally write code that is harder to read to produce readable diffs, and I don't know why generating schema.rb should be any different.