Cool will do. I'm not sure Im ready to roll next in production though. So i'll work on a solution for the current version in the meantime for the stable version of dm.
On Feb 10, 11:41 pm, "Dan Kubb (dkubb)" <[email protected]> wrote: > codaniel, > > > I found the source of 'the problem' unless Im misusing them . . . it > > seems that when you have a many to many relationship through an > > anonymous resource model.many_to_one_relationships doesn't return the > > relationship to that anonymous resource (by design?), but this is how > > dm-constraints adds constraints... > > > I wanted to take a crack at fixing it, but i wasn't sure if it was a > > bug in dm-core, or if dm-constraints should do a pass through > > many_to_many_relationships and see if it is through an anonymous > > resource. Thoughts? > > You might want to check out many to many associations in the "next" > branch. I began to implement things differently than it was done in > the master branch. I'd say I'm still only about 40-50% of the way > done, but the basic ideas are there. You should be able to access the > anonymous resource using the relationship objects. > > -- > > Dan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
