Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'bigint'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome to ProcessWire
    • News & Announcements
    • Showcase
    • Wishlist & Roadmap
  • Community Support
    • Getting Started
    • Tutorials
    • FAQs
    • General Support
    • API & Templates
    • Modules/Plugins
    • Themes and Profiles
    • Multi-Language Support
    • Security
    • Jobs
  • Off Topic
    • Pub
    • Dev Talk

Product Groups

  • Form Builder
  • ProFields
  • ProCache
  • ProMailer
  • Login Register Pro
  • ProDrafts
  • ListerPro
  • ProDevTools
  • Likes
  • Custom Development

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 1 result

  1. So, I've been wondering (since this evening) if it would be possible to extend default integer field with two features / settings: signed / unsigned size (nothing too fine-grained, most importantly INT, BIGINT and perhaps something like TINYINT) The main reason I'm suggesting this is that I've banged my head on a wall that is int(11) couple of times now and I'd very much prefer having better option than using a text field in those cases. Sure, a text field combined with proper filtering + sanitizing usually gets the job done just fine, but at the same time it feels more than a bit hackish and introduces yet another chance for human error to thrive. Signed / unsigned part would be just a "nice to have" extra feature and probably wouldn't be of use for most PW users, but from a DB design point of view it would make a heck of a lot of sense; if I'm only interested in positive integers (which is almost always the case, by the way) why would I allow negative input and especially if I'm not allowing it at UI level then why should it be allowed at DB level? Oh, and that extra space "unsigned" results in is a nice bonus I do know that this would be quite easy to put together as a new fieldtype, but I wanted to try tossing it around here first, just in case that someone else would feel that it'd be worth adding to built-in field. Obvious downside of this whole idea is that changing settings like these would require changes to DB schema, so what I'm asking for may not be possible at all -- in which case I'm probably just going to put together a new "big integer" field..
×
×
  • Create New...