On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Daniel Guettler <[email protected]>wrote:
> What are you trying to prove here? > I'm not using ActiveRecord and my Session class IS NOT inheriting from > ActiveRecord::Base either > > I'm trying to prove to you that ActiveModel works without ActiveRecord::Base. It works so much so I'm building ActiveRecord style interface to work with Maglev. Next, in your initial e-mail to the mailing list, you mentioned that there was a possible bug in Rails 3 routing. What does this have to do with the possible bug in routing? -Conrad > Session.anchestors => [Session, ActiveModel::Validations, > ActiveSupport::Callbacks, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, > JSON::Ext::Generator::GeneratorMethods::Object, > ActiveSupport::Dependencies::Loadable, Arel::Sql::ObjectExtensions, > Arel::ObjectExtensions, Kernel, BasicObject] > > I know how to add validations to it etc. (not included in this post to > keep the examples lean) the point I'm trying to make here is the > dependency of form_for on the :new_record? method. > > > > On Feb 20, 10:04 pm, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> Ok but I'm not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily > > >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And > > >> the attr_accessors didn't override anything since the table I created > > >> only contained an id attribute. > > > > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an > > > instance(s) of > > > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > > >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > > >> not going to be stored in the database. > > > > > Then you can simply do the following: > > > > > *require 'active_model' > > > > > class Session > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > > @attributes = attributes > > > end > > > > > end > > > > > puts "valid session" > > > puts > > > > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session.valid? # => false > > > puts session.password = "foobar" > > > puts session.valid? # => true > > > puts session.errors > > > > > puts > > > > > puts "invalid session" > > > puts > > > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session2.valid? # => false > > > puts session2.password = "foobar" > > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > > puts session2* > > > > > * > > > * > > > Good luck, > > > > > -Conrad > > > > Here's a better version: > > > > require 'active_model' > > > > class Session > > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > @attributes = attributes > > end > > > > end > > > > puts "valid session" > > puts > > > > session = Session.new > > puts session.login = 'foo' > > puts session.password = 'bar' > > puts session.valid? # => true > > puts session.errors > > > > puts > > > > puts "invalid session" > > puts > > session2 = Session.new > > puts session2.password = "bar" > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > puts session2.errors > > > > I wish that this helps. > > > > Good luck, > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > > > > > > >> The original implementation of Session was: > > > > >> class Session > > >> include ActiveModel::Validations > > >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > > >> end > > > > >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather > if it > > >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > > >> > >> doesn't respond to :new_record? > > > > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. > hasn't > > >> been > > >> > > saved) or > > >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the > Rails > > >> > > console. > > > > >> > > -Conrad > > > > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > > >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, > updated_at: > > >> nil> > > >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => false > > > > >> > -Conrad > > > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > >> > >> > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method > => > > >> :put is > > >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > > >> > >> > > html_options = > > >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && > > >> object.new_record? > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > >> > >> > > else > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > >> > >> > > end > > > > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an > update > > >> action. > > > > >> > >> > -Conrad > > > > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it > > >> will > > >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > > >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided > > >> options > > >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => > > >> :post } > > >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be > appreciated... > > > > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler < > [email protected]> > > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that > for_for(Session.new, > > >> :url > > >> > >> => > > >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method > to > > >> put > > >> > >> which > > >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is > > >> defined > > >> > >> > > > for PUT /login > > >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the > method to > > >> PUT > > > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler < > [email protected] > > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not > been > > >> in > > >> > >> there, > > >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal > > >> here > > >> > >> just a > > >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what's going on here) makes > the > > >> > >> everything > > >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > > > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn't be related but this is what I have > so > > >> > >> far... > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > > >> [email protected]> > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not > equivalent > > >> to > > >> > >> what I > > >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > > >> routing > > >> > >> file > > >> > >> > > for > > >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > > >> action_dispatch/ > > >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > >> > >> > > > > > get 'login' => 'session#new' > > >> > >> > > > > > post 'login' => 'session#create', :as => :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match > > > > >> > >> > > > > > match 'login' => 'session#new', :via => :get > > >> > >> > > > > > match 'login' => 'session#create', :via => :post > > > > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and > post > > >> just > > >> > >> add > > >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > >> > >> > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > > >> > >> [email protected]> > > >> > >> > > wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > >> > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this > > >> ActionController::RoutingError and > > >> > >> just > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a > bug > > >> in the > > >> > >> > > Rails 3 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get 'login' => 'session#new' > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> post 'login' => 'session#create', :as => > :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The 'get' > and > > >> > >> 'post' > > >> > >> > > HTTP verbs > > >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of > a > > >> > >> resource > > >> > >> > > block. For > > >> > >> > > > > > > > example, > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > or > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you > could > > >> have > > >> > >> > > easily > > >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match 'login' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => > > >> :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > Correction: match 'login' => "user_sessions#new", > > >> :as => > > >> > >> > > :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match 'login' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => > > >> :logout > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 > > >> 17:45:49 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > > >> > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: > > >> 0.2ms) > > >> > >> with 200 > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > > -- > 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]<rubyonrails-talk%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- 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.
