No love for those using named routes and form_for in trunk?
form_for(:comment, comment, new_comment_url
(article.hash_for_permalink)) do |f|
=> can't convert Symbol into String
also the docs are no longer valid as it doesn't use :url => {}
def form_for(object_name, object, options = {}, &proc)
raise ArgumentError, "Missing block" unless block_given?
concat(form_tag(options, options.delete(:html) || {}),
proc.binding)
fields_for(object_name, object, options, &proc)
concat('</form>', proc.binding)
end
why not use the same convention as start_form_tag instead of html?
def form_for(object_name, object, url_options = {},
html_options = {}, &proc)
raise ArgumentError, "Missing block" unless block_given?
concat(form_tag(url_options, html_options), proc.binding)
fields_for(object_name, object, url_options, &proc)
concat('</form>', proc.binding)
end
ah... actually no... because you need to support the :builder option.
So should we be returning back to the old syntax that uses :url?
-- tim lucas
_______________________________________________
Rails-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
