aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb')
-rw-r--r--activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb7
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb b/activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb
index 49df98d6c1..c5aacb010a 100644
--- a/activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb
+++ b/activemodel/lib/active_model/validations/clusivity.rb
@@ -31,10 +31,11 @@ module ActiveModel
end
# In Ruby 1.9 <tt>Range#include?</tt> on non-numeric ranges checks all possible values in the
- # range for equality, so it may be slow for large ranges. The new <tt>Range#cover?</tt>
- # uses the previous logic of comparing a value with the range endpoints.
+ # range for equality, which is slower but more accurate. <tt>Range#cover?</tt> uses
+ # the previous logic of comparing a value with the range endpoints, which is fast
+ # but is only accurate on numeric ranges.
def inclusion_method(enumerable)
- enumerable.is_a?(Range) ? :cover? : :include?
+ (enumerable.is_a?(Range) && enumerable.first.is_a?(Numeric)) ? :cover? : :include?
end
end
end