3 ms·
I agree `deleted_after` is a more appropriate name than `deleted_at`, but it starts to run into naming conventions again. For example `published_at` is often us
by rodw 4y ago
I agree `deleted_after` is a more appropriate name than `deleted_at`, but it starts to run into naming conventions again. For example `published_at` is often used in editorial systems (newspapers, blogs, etc.) for things that "embargoed until" some future date. `published_after` or even just `pub_dt` would probably be more appropriate, but I feel like the `_at` suffix is well established in some contexts.
For what it's worth, I have built and managed systems where "delete/disable this thing in the future" is a valid use case, but I'm wondering whether/how often/how the date aspect of the Rails-style `deleted_at` is actually used. Does anyone ever care when the record was deleted, or is it just extra metadata that is occasionally used in an ad hoc way for debugging or diagnostics. If the typical rails app replaced `deleted_at` with boolean-valued column, would it actually matter?
- djur 4y agoI have relied on *_at timestamps countless times, for support, analytics, etc. deleted_at in specific? Less often, sure.