I'm very new to all of active records modules and am not sure where this method belongs. I'm not sure if your question was in reference to my "original naive implementation" or just about the proposal in general.
On Friday, November 7, 2014 4:24:39 AM UTC-8, Austin Story wrote: > > Wouldn't this encourage breaking dependency inversion principle? > > On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:33:12 PM UTC-6, Danny Sperry wrote: >> >> About a month ago I ran into a case where I needed to know if an AR >> object's association exists dynamically. I was building a CMS Engine. >> >> I thought maybe this was a one off, but last week I found out my >> co-worker also had a need for this in the CMS he was building. So I've come >> to the community to see if this is something we think should be added into >> ActiveRecord. >> >> I originally solved for this quite naively with the following solution >> >> def is_association?(attribute) >> respond_to?(attribute) && !attribute_names.include?(attribute.to_s) >> end >> >> and after trying to actually solve it in ActiveRecord I discovered >> reflections. I think this is easily solved with something like the >> following method inside lib/active_record/assocations.rb or >> lib/active_record/relation.rb >> >> def has_association?(name) >> reflections.include? name >> end >> >> I'm new to contributing to open source and have been developing with >> Rails for about a year so any and all questions, comments, criticism is >> welcome. >> >> Thanks! >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
