Forum: Ruby on Rails ActiveRecord::Validation#valid? throws strange ArgumentError

I'm running Rails 1.2.1 with Ruby 1.8.4. The following script/console
session reveals the problem one of my models is suffering:


>> r=Reminder.new
=> #<Reminder:0xb73cf3d4 @new_record=true,
@attributes={"receiver_id"=>nil, "sent_date"=>nil, "appt_date"=>nil,
"notify"=>nil}>
>> r.valid?
ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (1 for 0)
        from
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-1.15.1/lib/active_record/callbacks.rb:328:in
`notify'
        from
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-1.15.1/lib/active_record/callbacks.rb:328:in
`callback'
        from
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-1.15.1/lib/active_record/callbacks.rb:301:in
`valid?'
        from (irb):2


Here is my model:

class Reminder < ActiveRecord::Base
  belongs_to(:receiver)

  validates_presence_of(:appt_date)
  validates_numericality_of(:notify)
  validates_presence_of(:receiver_id)
end


Here is my migration:

def self.up
    create_table :reminders do |t|
      t.column(:appt_date, :datetime, :null => false)
      t.column(:notify, :integer, :null => false)
      t.column(:sent_date, :datetime)
      t.column(:receiver_id, :integer, :null => false)
    end

    add_index(:reminders, :receiver_id)
end


What gives? `r.valid?` should return false. I have similar, more complex
setups with other models using validates_presence_of and
validates_numericality_of and they do not throw ArgumentErrors. As
expected, if I comment out the validates_* method calls the problem goes
away.

Any help is greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance ;)

On 2/12/07, Chris Stump <rails-mailing-list@andreas-s.net> wrote:
> ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (1 for 0)
>         from
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-1.15.1/lib/active_record/callbacks.rb:328:in
> `notify'
>   ...

Ouch!  callbacks.rb:328 shows that #notify is an internally used
private method.  Your notify attribute is colliding with this.  Try
choosing another name (as unsatisfying as that solution probably
seems...).