constraints

I'm only getting the default validator message. What am I doing wrong? class Questao { static hasMany = [alternativas:Alternativa] static constraints = { alternativas (validator: {val, obj -> if(val.size() < 2) return ['validator.message'] //custom message }) } } /i18n questao.alternativas.validator.message = "must be greater than two" default.invalid.validator.message= Property [{0}] of class [{1}] with value [{2}] does not pass custom validation Thanks You're returning a list containing your message code - you need to return just the code: alternativas validator: { val, obj -> if (val.size()

what I am trying to do is have an large image contained within a smaller div that the user can drag around within the containing div (easy enough)... similar to http://oneblackbear.com/draggable/index.html but I want to prevent users from dragging it any further then the container boundary. With the above example the user can drag the image completely outside of the containing div... I want to prevent the user from ever dragging the image outside of the parent div at all. I have tried using jQuery UI draggable but the problem is if I use the constraint option as soon as you drag the image it

Let me first explain the table structure: +-----------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-----------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | firstname | varchar(255) | NO | | NULL | | | name | varchar(255) | NO | | NULL | | +-----------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ The id field is referenced from another table through a foreign key. Say I have a function in my model like this: public function delete_user($id) { return $this->db-

I have a list of items I want to buy. The items are offered by different shops and different prices. The shops have individual delivery costs. I'm looking for an optimal shopping strategy (and a java library supporting it) to purchase all of the items with a minimal total price. Example: Item1 is offered at Shop1 for $100, at Shop2 for $111. Item2 is offered at Shop1 for $90, at Shop2 for $85. Delivery cost of Shop1: $10 if total order < $150; $0 otherwise Delivery cost of Shop2: $5 if total order < $50; $0 otherwise If I buy Item1 and Item2 at Shop1 the total cost is $100 + $90 +$0 = $190. If

I've spent a good amount of time trying to figure out how to implement a CASCADE ON DELETE for recursive primary keys on SQL Server for some time now. I've read about triggers, creating temporary tables, etc but have yet to find an answer that will work with my database design. Here is a Boss/Employee database example that will work for demonstration purposes: TABLE employee id|name |boss_id --|---------|------- 1 |John |1 2 |Hillary |1 3 |Hamilton |1 4 |Scott |2 5 |Susan |2 6 |Seth |2 7 |Rick |5 8 |Rachael |5 As you can see, each employee has a boss that is also an employee. So, there is a PK

Given a choice between OWL Property Restrictions and SHACL , is there any reason to choose the OWL approach any more? Particularly with respect to cardinality constraints, I'm wondering whether SHACL is considered to supercede OWL. The syntax appears similar, to my casual inspection. I am probably missing the purpose of OWL cardinality constraints. As part of an ontology, they should facilitate inferencing (a separate concern from validation). But how do cardinality constraints facilitate inferencing? The differences between OWL and SHACL are presented in the table below. | OWL | SHACL | |----