Okay, I see that you don't share the same feelings I have about this. No
problem. Usually I'd want my overridden method to notice any change to
those values and I find annoying have to write code like this in my
controller:
[:deleted, :disabled].each{|p| model.send :"#{p}=", params[p] == 'true' }
There isn't a better alternative to this currently with AR, but as I
said, I'm okay with that and I won't push this particular discussion
further.
The only thing I'm concerned about is your last statement: "You're also
supposed to call the model accessor's method as well, as those are
actually a public interface. [] and []= is not."
How can I know what is a public interface or not? Should I revert my
documentation changes in docrails? I mean, if they are not public, I
shouldn't mention them in the official documentation.
I'm worried about using them in my code and then suddenly Rails deciding
to not making them available in future releases.
I mean, is it reliable for me to keep using such interface instead of
read/write_attribute?
Best,
Rodrigo.
Em 06-04-2012 12:29, Prem Sichanugrist escreveu:
The intention of [] and []= is so that you can override your model's
accessor.
def username=(username)
self[:username] = username
end
If we fix the []= to call the accessor as well, that will lead to
circular reference, and there will be no way to set those variables.
You're also supposed to call the model accessor's method as well, as
those are actually a public interface. [] and []= is not.
- Prem
On Apr 6, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Ken Collins wrote:
They are established aliases to read and write attribute. I know
changing would break a ton of my own code and various gems I author.
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 6, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Currently [] and []= are defined as follows for ActiveRecord instances:
https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/activerecord/lib/active_record/attribute_methods.rb
def [](attr_name)
read_attribute(attr_name)
end
def []=(attr_name, value)
write_attribute(attr_name, value)
end
If those accessors are used then overridden attribute accessors
wouldn't be called.
I didn't find any references about the []/[]= methods in the current
API, so I just mentioned them in docrails:
https://github.com/lifo/docrails/commit/a49fe6ec2cb9f22a3b18d7db5ae2ee90325e9d09
But then I realized that the given example may have undesired side
effects:
[:deleted, :disabled].each{|p| model[p] = params[p] == 'true' }
What if "deleted=" or "disabled=" were overridden? They wouldn't be
called.
So I was thinking that maybe Rails 4 could change their
implementation to:
def [](attr_name)
send attr_name.to_s
end
def []=(attr_name, value)
send :"#{attr_name}=", value
end
Better to read this style of code in some framework than inside some
application...
Any thoughts?
Happy Easter!
Rodrigo.
--
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.
