I am new to rails as well, so you might take my advise with a grain of
salt, but I needed a similar feature myself this very evening so I
found a method of adding the following to a method in one of your
controllers:
headers['Content-Type'] = "application/vnd.ms-excel"
headers['Content-Disposition'] = 'attachment;
filename="report.xls"'
headers['Cache-Control'] = ''
Then in the corresponding view you simply put a table with all your
data in it.. for example:
<table border="1">
<tr>
<th>First Name</th><th>Last Name</th>
</tr>
<% @user.each do |u| %>
<tr>
<td><%= user.firstname %></td><td><%= user.lastname %></td>
<% end %>
</tr>
</table>
When you visit that page it will promt for a download.. so if you were
to simply link to that page it would bring up a download prompt.
Its quick and dirty.. but I have no idea if it is the best way to do
it!
Aaron
On May 26, 4:10 pm, Peter Bell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Still fairly new to Rails. Want to see if I'm doing anything un-idiomatic.
> Few questions of style:
>
> 1. "public controller"
> I'm using a "public" controller. It seems to be a good semantic choice,
> because it's for the landing page and the other few pages that public site
> visitors go to. I see "home" more often, but while home is meaningful for the
> landing page, it doesn't seem a great word to describe the collection of
> pages accessible to site visitors who have not registered (/, about_us,
> tesrms_and_conditions, etc), hence my choice of "public" which seems to
> better fit what I'm trying to express. Weird or just different?
>
> 2. rspec view naming
> I know the default naming convention for a views/public/landing.html.erb is
> spec/views/public/landing.html.erb_spec.rb
> This seems like a bad idea. I don't want to test that it's an erb file - I
> want to test that the landing.html page contains whatever I want it to
> contain. So if I move from erb to haml that should not require me to rewrite
> or rename my test. As such, a better convention seems to be:
> spec/views/public/landing.html_spec.rb
>
> Any thoughts/opinions? I know it's small stuff, but I'm trying to balance
> idioms with standard best practices with what seems to me to be the most
> readable and DRYest approach to writing the code.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Peter
--
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.
