Skip to content

Commit a5a25f9

Browse files
committed
minor #7131 Clarify the mappings that require no method prefix. (richsage)
This PR was squashed before being merged into the 2.7 branch (closes #7131). Discussion ---------- Clarify the mappings that require no method prefix. On the Validation page, there is a section about "getter" constraints. In the note it wasn't clear about where the prefix should be dropped, given that the example annotation constraints doesn't include any method specifics. This PR clarifies that. Commits ------- e82c918 Clarify the mappings that require no method prefix.
2 parents cfa2611 + e82c918 commit a5a25f9

File tree

1 file changed

+3
-3
lines changed

1 file changed

+3
-3
lines changed

validation.rst

Lines changed: 3 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -639,9 +639,9 @@ Now, create the ``isPasswordLegal()`` method and include the logic you need::
639639
.. note::
640640

641641
The keen-eyed among you will have noticed that the prefix of the getter
642-
("get", "is" or "has") is omitted in the mapping. This allows you to move
643-
the constraint to a property with the same name later (or vice versa)
644-
without changing your validation logic.
642+
("get", "is" or "has") is omitted in the mappings for the YAML, XML and PHP
643+
formats. This allows you to move the constraint to a property with the same
644+
name later (or vice versa) without changing your validation logic.
645645

646646
.. _validation-class-target:
647647

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)