2009/5/21 Pardee, Roy <[email protected]> > At the risk of being nitpicky, @@variables are not globals--they are > class variables. Globals vars start with a $. >
Yes of course, I am still getting the hang of ruby. I think my comments still apply, though not quite as strongly. I suppose if I wrap it in a class method I can probably live with my conscience. Of course my whole concept of having a 'special' record is a bit yucky. I think maybe some refactoring is in order to improve the whole design. Colin > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Colin Law > *Sent:* Thursday, May 21, 2009 9:30 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [Rails] Re: Referencing 'constant' record in db > > 2009/5/21 Stephan Wehner <[email protected]> > >> >> Colin Law wrote: >> > 2009/5/21 Stephan Wehner <[email protected]> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > I am trying to avoid a db query each time I reference the (constant) >> id >> > when >> > the application is running, that was the idea of looking it up when the >> > class is loaded and saving in a constant (which does not work in test >> > mode >> > as the fixtures have not always been loaded when the class is loaded) >> > >> >> I meant it is not clear what the nature of this special record is, and >> what conditions you have. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> If for the Item class there is just this one special record, can you >> >> force the id to be simply 0 by manipulating the database? >> >> >> > >> > My initial solution was to have a well-known id for the special record. >> > The >> > problem with this in testing is that one has to then include the special >> > record with that id explicitly in the fixture. One cannot then make use >> > of >> > the automatic fixup of habtm tables using the names of the fixture >> > records >> > and so have to manually provide fixtures for the habtm join tables. >> > Plus >> > the idea of a record in the db having a well-known id is a bit yucky. >> >> How about adding this method to your Item class: >> >> # is this the special record "named_scope_for_constant_record" ? >> def special? >> @@special_record_id ||= Item.named_scope_for_constant_record.id >> self.id == @@special_record_id_id >> end >> > > Of course, I should have thought of using a global variable rather than a > constant. I didn't because I generally consider global variables to be > evil. I think this may be the first time for many a year that I have found > a good use for one. Though really, though technically it is a global > variable, it is being used as a constant. > > Problem solved, many thanks for helping > > Colin > > >> >> There is a thread-issue around using ||= ( >> >> http://coderrr.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/is-not-thread-safe-neither-is-hashnew-hk >> ) but that doesn't matter here. >> >> Now you can even stub the special? method. Also, if the condition for >> special? changes you just change the method. >> >> Stephan >> >> > Colin >> >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > GHC Confidentiality Statement > > This message and any attached files might contain confidential information > protected by federal and state law. The information is intended only for the > use of the individual(s) or entities originally named as addressees. The > improper disclosure of such information may be subject to civil or criminal > penalties. If this message reached you in error, please contact the sender > and destroy this message. Disclosing, copying, forwarding, or distributing > the information by unauthorized individuals or entities is strictly > prohibited by law. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
