Closed stijn-starmind closed 7 years ago
That is actually a very good point; right now the value is the actual thing that's being validated (in this case the size), but I agree that it's misleading, and the actual culprit is reflected in the constraint text. I'll add it as a bug for the next milestone.
Fix should be presently available in 0.7-SNAPSHOT builds.
With version 0.6.1:
results in
I would expect
List(1,2,3)
as thevalue
(firstRuleViolation
parameter) for both violations. Now the first violations reads "3 has size 3" which is very confusing.