I have overridden the standard Rails FormHelper to get it to spit form elements out in our (pretty much Bootstrap-based) format (after http://www.likeawritingdesk.com/posts/very-custom-form-builders-in-rails).
It works fine, but it is difficult to write a spec for. I am using a spec like this:
rendered_form = helper.my_custom_form_for(#account, :url => '/accounts') do |f|
f.inputs do
# This isn't rendered
f.text_field 'name', :size => 30
# This is rendered
f.select 'locale', options_for_select([%w(Australia en-AU), %w(UK en-GB)])
end
end
What is rendered includes the select tag, but not the text field tag. I suspect this is because of the way ActionView handles blocks now, appending the return value of the block rather than the return value of each statement in the block. Obviously, when used in context in an app, the helper method gets passed some ERB and evaluates in that context.
Am I right that it's not possible to test rendering helper methods in this way, with multiple statements in a block?
If I am right, what would be the least hacky way of making a spec that does the same thing as the helper does in the context of a full app? Make an ERB string and somehow pass it to the helper to render?
Did you solve this? I am curious if you are just getting the last statment in the block returned. Have you tried changing the f.text_field/f.select order to see what gets returned? If so, then you just need to add them:
rendered_form = helper.my_custom_form_for(#account, :url => '/accounts') do |f|
f.inputs do
f.text_field('name', :size => 30) +
f.select('locale', options_for_select([%w(Australia en-AU), %w(UK en-GB)]))
end
end
Related
I have a Rails app that pulls in music from Soundcloud. This data contains a title, which I save as mix.sc_title but it's not always properly formatted. I have added an additional attribute on my Mix model which I call mix.override_title
For display on my site, I want to use the override title if available, and the sc_title in all other cases.
I have a Mix model method to do this for me
def display_title
override_title.blank? sc_title : override_title
end
Mixes#index grabs #mixes = Mix.where(:active => true) and mixes/index.html.erb looks like this:
<ul>
<% #mixes.each do |mix| %>
<li><%= link_to mix.display_title, mix %></li>
<% end %>
</ul>
As you can see, I'm not directly using any mix attributes, and so I take a huge hit when I go to the DB, and I don't actually benefit from it.
Is there a leaner way to get just the information I need? (mix.display_title)
I have tried Mix.select("display_title").where(:active => true) but it fails because display_title is not a real DB column
You can do Mix.select("sc_title, override_title").where(:active => true) and it will work, since those are the actual fields that the method uses. I don't really think getting the additional attributes gives you that much of a DB hit but sometimes selecting only what you need can be beneficial.
As you start chaining on more Arel commands, consider putting the select into a model method:
def select_active_titles
select("sc_title, override_title").where(:active => true)
end
Edit: Your link_to helper also secretly calls mix.id to link to the right mix, so make sure it's working and if not add id to the list of selected attributes.
I'm a Ruby-on-Rails newbie, just starting out.
I have an MVC called "account_types", generated via scaffold to produce:
controllers/account_types_controller.rb
helpers/account_types_helper.rb
models/account_type.rb
views/account_types/_form, edit, index etc...
Going to localhost:3000/account_types gives me the index view.
What I'd like to do is display the same data as selected from the account_types index method in the application index page as a list.
I wrote a new view called account_types/_list.html_erb as follows:
<ul>
<% #account_types.each do |account| %>
<li><% account.label %></li>
<% end %>
</ul>
I then edited home/index.html.erb (This is based on examples given in other questions on SO):
<%= render :partial => 'account_types/list', :module_types => #module_types %>
However I get
undefined method `each' for nil:NilClass
and the error displays the code from account_types/_list.html.erb where I've written
<% #account_types.each do |account| %>
The scaffolded views work fine, why aren't mine?
Are partials the right thing to use here?
Thanks in advance.
What is the correct way to define an application-wide partial and its variables in rails says to use a before_filter on ApplicationController.
You pass :module_types to partial, but use account_types. As I can see you just need to change your index.html.erb to:
<%= render :partial => 'account_types/list', :account_types => #module_types %>
You can use partials for this if you want, though it would be unnecessary in this case as far as I can tell (they are for sharing chunks of code between several views). In order to get this code to work you'll need to define #account_types in your controller with something like
#account_types = AccountType.all
You can see exact line in your account_types_controller.rb under index action. :module_types => #module_types is not necessary here, since I doubt you defined #module_types either and you don't use module_types in your partial at all.
It's obvious, that you don't understand how Rails works, so I suggest reading through a good tutorial (like this one) before you proceed with whatever you have in mind.
I have a problem with the normal way rails operates when using nested forms / resources and routing.
I have two tables, Words and Definitions...
Words have many definitions, but I do not create a Word until it has at least one definition.
Everything on the model and controller end works but I cannot figure out how to handle the form helpers.
<%= semantic_form_for [#word, #definition] do |f| %>
This works perfectly but only if #word actually exists and is not a new UNSAVED record. IE in the controller I am doing a find_or_initialize_by call for Word then building a definition off of that.
<%= semantic_form_for [:word, #definition] do |f| %>
This words but only if the word doesn't exist. IE if I try to edit using this construction I get an odd url (which doesn't work). words/12345/definition/12345
I tried using the url_for helper but had similar results as above...
Any other ideas?
Mongoid doesn't initialize embedded documents by default. You need to build them yourself most likely with a callback in your Word model:
after_initialize :build_definition
def build_definition
self.definitions.build unless self.definitions.any?
end
If you wanna stay CRUD and allow definitions to be created before words, you must duplicate routes for definitions, one inside words and one outside, so you can do:
<%= semantic_form_for [#definition] do |f| %>
I now this has been asked a thousand times but that doesn't help me heh :) I've been at this an hour. My form:
= form_for #comment, :url_for => { :action => "create", :controller => "comments"}, :method => :post
my rake routes:
POST /t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments(.:format) {:action=>"create", :controller=>"comments"}
trunk_root_comment GET /t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments/:id(.:format) {:action=>"show", :controller=>"comments"}
The error:
undefined method `comments_path' for #<#<Class:0x007fed2c713128>:0x007fed2c71cc78>
If I name space the form to:
= form_for [:trunk_root, #comment], :url_for => { :action => "create", :controller => "comments"}, :method => :post do |f|
which should make the route trunk_root_comments_path.. which is correct according to the rake routes.. I get:
No route matches {:controller=>"comments", :format=>nil}
Help is very much appreciated.. been looking at this for hours..
UPDATE:
Thank you Ryan for such a great answer! A very clear explanation of something I was just sort of 'throwing things' at, now at least I understand better. I actually already had 'trunk_root_comments_path' available in my rake routes, and I had tried a couple of the combinations you mentioned, but I wasn't really grocking what I was missing, so you helped. I'm using Mongo and I don't actually have a Trunk model, I just have an attribute on roots called #root.trunk, though I have a trunk controller and therefore its a part of my routes(maybe a bad idea idk).
So I tried your TLDR and it said error:
Undefined method 'root_comments_path'
.. cause no Trunk model exists, I assume?.. so I made #trunk just equal the correct id with
= form_for [#trunk, #root, #comment] do |f|
<- and I got 'undefined method `politics_root_comments_path''.. I figured well.. that probably makes sense.. since I'm failing I must as well try your most explicit version:
= form_for #comment, :url => (trunk_root_comments_path(:trunk_id => #root.trunk, :root_id => #root.id)) do |f|
and sure enough that worked... so I'm not quite sure how to do it shorter then this.. the odd thing for me is I have another nested resource "photos" at the same level of depth in the routes and I was able to get that to work with = form_for [:trunk_root, #photo], :html => { :class => 'root_form' } do |f|.. but here for some reason I couldn't.. anyways I'd say you gave me enough to understand 100% but I think I went from 20% understanding to 50% understanding.. I know now that id's ARE important to routes, and the named helpers need access to them. I got an introduction to how the url_helper works, but would need to read more on it to really grock it fully I think. I'm also now able to construct proper routes in their longer form at least to get through tricky situations like this. So thank you :)
TL;DR You need to specify both a :trunk_id and a root_id in your URL or use form_for like this:
<%= form_for [#trunk, #root, #comment] do |f| %>
Rails is attempting to build a URL from the hash you're giving it, but that hash doesn't match anything in its routing table. You could do this:
{ :controller => "comments", :action => "create", :trunk_id => trunk.id, :root_id => root.id }
But that's really a bit tl;dr.
The cooler way to do it is this:
trunk_root_comments_path(trunk, root)
Where trunk and root are Trunk and Root instances respectively.
Now, if you want to be super-wicked-cool, do it like this:
<%= form_for [trunk, root, comment] do |f| %>
Science!
So how does this work? Elementary, my dear:
Rails first recognises that we're using form_for using an Array and that we mean business. Rails uses this array passed in and builds a URL out of it. It does this by using the routing helpers that are defined by the routes. Unfortunately, you've defined your routes in a funny way that don't play nice with this, but don't fear! We can fix this.
The way you can do it is this where you have this in config/routes.rb:
post '/t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments'
Instead put this:
post '/t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments', :as => "trunk_root_comments"
You may alternatively already have this:
match '/t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments', :via => :post
Which should become this:
match '/t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments', :via => :post, :as => "trunk_root_comments"
Either way, you've now got not one, but two(!!) path helpers defined by the routes. These aretrunk_root_comments_path and trunk_root_comments_url respectively. The names of these methods are super important for what I am about to explain to you. Pay attention!
So, back to our little form_for call:
<%= form_for [trunk, root, comment] do |f| %>
Rails knows that we're using an Array because it can see it. What it does with this Array may seem like magic, but isn't really.
Rails will take each element of this array and build a routing helper method name up from the different parts. This isn't actually part of form_for, but another method called url_for that you can use by itself:
url_for([trunk, root, comment])
In the beginning, this routing helper method name generated by url_for is simply an empty array ([]). Nothing special at all.
But then what happens is special!
The first element is going to be a persisted instance of the Trunk class. By "persisted" I mean that it's an object that maps directly to a record in the database. Yay ORMs!
Rails will know this, and so will turn the routing helper into this: [:trunk].
The second element is going to be a persisted instance of the Root class. Rails also knows this (damn, Rails is smart!) and will then append this to the array, turning it into [:trunk, :root]. Awesome.
The third (and final) element is then checked by Rails. It sees that (in this case) it's a non-persisted element, i.e. it's not been saved to the database.. yet. Rails treats this differently and will instead append [:comments] to the array, turning it into this:
[:trunk, :root, :comments]
See where I'm going with this now?
Now that Rails has done it's thing (or thang, if you like) it will join these three parts together like this: trunk_root_comments, and just for good measure it'll put _path on the end of it, turning it into the final trunk_root_comments_path helper.
And then! Man, and then... Rails calls this method and passes it arguments! Just like this:
trunk_root_comments_path(:trunk_id => trunk.id, :root_id => root_id)
This generates a full path to the resource like this:
/t/:trunk_id/r/:root_id/comments
And bam! Full circle! That's how Rails will know to generate the URL and you don't have to use ugly hashes anymore.
Success!
Not sure if you have this route set up but try:
= form_for #comment, :url => trunk_root_comments_path
How can I disable automatic conversion of HTML tags in Rails3? I have output in some controller view. For example I have method which outputs simple HTML link set..
[:en, :de].map{ |locale| link_to locate.to_s.upcase , { :locale => locate } ...
In view I'm calling my method <%= my_method %>
As a result I get this:
| <a href="/login?class=language_selected&locale=en">EN</a>
How can I disable it?
I haven't worked with Rails3 so no guarantees. but it looks like this has to do with the fact that your method returns a list.
Rails will usually format internal data structures for output by escaping the special characters and displaying the html escaped interpretation of your data.
Try tacking a .join onto the end of your map call to return a string
[:en, :de].map{ |locale|
link_to locate.to_s.upcase , { :locale => locate }
...
}.join("<br/>")
Also rwilliams aka r-dub's suggestion to use raw will probably be necessary addition to this code. raw on a list however may give you an undesirable result probably because of an internal to_string call. Which is an implicit join(""). So add the raw to the method call in addition to returning a string.
<%= raw my_method %>
If you're sure your methods output is safe then you can use the raw method.
<%= raw my_method %>