On Jul 8, 9:05 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Agree. some_model/1/other_model/2 is a lame way to refer to join_model/1. > > Putting polymorphism aside, what about: > > posts/1/comments/34 > > Which then lets me do > > @post = user.posts.find(params[:post_id]) > @comment = @post.comments.find(params[:id]) > > Does that suck? > > -- > Cheers > > Koz
Not at all. The alternative implies: If you go around promoting every 2-way association (habtm) to an actual Entity, you probably want to crack open the PoEAA and brush up a bit on Domain Model. Your object model can be richer than your database schema. That's not a bad thing. Trying to achieve 1:1 parity between the two seems awfully misguided. More than that, a single authoritative URI for a particular resource seems arbitrarily limiting. Objects don't work that way (see: references). Your database schema doesn't work that way. What goal is being achieved through it? Nothing at all pragmatic as far as I can tell... In fact, the idea that 2-way associations should be banished from your Domain Model is entirely unique to Rails as far as my limited experience suggests, and it certainly doesn't strike me as a good idea at all, but more a misrepresentation of "you can" into "you should". I might even go so far as to call the unjustified and/or indescriminate promotion of habtm relationships to has_many => :through as a "code smell", though I personally can't stand the phrase. :-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
