Hi Glenn,

  My take would be that if they are dealing with local data and business
logic, app/models is absolutely the right place for them.

  We get into this feeling in the rails world like all models have to be DB
backed and inherit from active record, and in my opinion that harms our code
organization.  It both leads to things getting placed outside of their
natural location (e.g. in lib) or getting shoe-horned into a larger active
record class when they should really be standalone models that have nothing
to do with active record.

-Kevin

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Glenn Little <[email protected]> wrote:

> I want to define a class or two that are kinda-sorta model like, but
> not really.  They deal with local data and business logic, but are not
> at all "active-record"-y.  Is there a best-practice place to define
> this sort of thing?
>
> I ended up putting it in appname/lib/myclass.rb, but that didn't feel
> quite right for some reason.  I had considered putting it in
> appname/app/models and am still thinking maybe that's the right place,
> even though this isn't a model in the usual sense.
>
> One other place I tried putting it was in appname/lib/xyz/myclass.rb
> (the "xyz" made organizational sense, and this is where I really
> wanted to put it) but I ran into all sorts of very strange issues that
> looked like dependency issues when rails tried to load it.  It almost
> seemed like it was getting loaded twice and bombing out the second
> time, but I was never able to fully get a handle on what was going on.
>  So I punted and just put it in lib for now but...
>
> Is there a typical pattern for this sort of thing?  This is rails2 by
> the way, if it makes any difference.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -glenn
>
> --
> SD Ruby mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby

-- 
SD Ruby mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby

Reply via email to