On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Daniel Guettler
<[email protected]>wrote:
> Initially looking at the problem suggested a routing bug since as
> stated in my first message the output in the log file contained:
>
> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1
>
> even so submitting the login form actually used _method => :put which
> in Rails 2.x would have been reported as:
>
> Processing ... (for 127.0.0.1) [PUT]
>
> further investigation (after my first post) made clear that the
> problem was not related to routing but was due to the way form_for
> determines which method to use if not specified.
> Since I was NOT using ActiveRecord::Base my Session was NOT responding
> to :new_record? which caused form_for adding _method => :put
>
> Now what is the takeaway message here?
> 1) Session should implement a form of new_record? if you want to use
> it with form_for OR
> 2) explicitly set the :html => { :method => :post } in form_for so it
> doesn't make wrong guesses
> 3) it may be worth considering changing the logging to actually read:
> Started PUT "/login" for 127.0.0.1 IFF the _method parameter is set
> to :put
>
>
In short, you're trying to make non ArctiveRecord objects behave like
ActiveRecord. Thus, I would recommend reading the very good write-up
by Yehuda Katz, a Rails core member, because your object, as it stands,
isn't fully compatible with Rails 3, more specifically, ActionPack:
http://yehudakatz.com/2010/01/10/activemodel-make-any-ruby-object-feel-like-activerecord
Good luck,
-Conrad
>
> On Feb 21, 5:01 am, Conrad Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 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' =>
> >
> > ...
> >
> > 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.
