Maybe I'm stupid but Rails provides this nifty syntax for generating URL's like so:
url_for([user, comment]) # => /users/1/comment/1
Passing :edit allows me to create something like this:
url_for([:edit, user, comment]) # => /users/1/comment/1/edit
but is there some way to do following?
url_for([:new, user, comments]) # => NoMethodError: undefined method `new_user_comments_url'
UPDATE: Added more information.
My routes.rb:
resources :users do
resources :comments
end
resources :posts do
resources :comments
end
My problem here is, that I can't use Rails auto-generated url helper (user_comments_url), because I'm sharing the views for both user comments and post comments.
There are two workarounds (but no one feels like the "Rails"-way) for my problem:
Adding logic to the view, e.g. some if conditions.
Defining my own url helpers like new_parent_comment(user_or_blog).
Ok, found a solution, but I'm not sure if this is the intended one:
url_for([:new, user, :comment]) # => '/users/1/comments/new'
url_for([:new, post, :comment]) # => '/posts/1/comments/new'
Stuck with the same problem, and found next solution (tested on Rails 5.2):
url_for([user, Comment, action: :new])
where Comment model class name.
By the way, action also could be :edit.
According to the Rails Docs url_for uses the class name of the object passed to generate the RESTful route. It also states that with nested routes it can not make this assumption correctly:
If you have a nested route, such as admin_workshop_path you’ll have to call that explicitly (it’s impossible for url_for to guess that route).
I would suggest using a named route here something like new_user_comment_path(). I am assuming you have set up your routes.rb something like:
resources :users do
resources :comments do
end
end
Additionally you can run rake routes to print out the proper names for all your routes.
Hope this helps,
/Salernost
Could this simply be a typo? I think the last line should read comment, not comments:
url_for([:new, user, comment])
(Assuming your comment variable has been defined.)
Related
Ive been trying to create a simple route on rails, following this instructions
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html
my problem is that when I want to enter to my method I get a weird error.
I have a controler user and on my routes I wrote something like this
resources :users do
match "/custom/" => "user#custom"
end
So, at my controller I add this code
def custom
#user = User.find(params[:user_id])
end
but when I try to enter doing localhost:3000/users/1/custom I get an error like
uninitialized constant UserController
doing rake routes I can see
user_custom /users/:user_id/custom(.:format) user#custom
Any idea how to solve this problem?
I want this route to submit a form... is it possible to use this route (if i make it run) for use ajax? I want to submit a form.
Thanks
Change your route to:
resources :users do
match "/custom/" => "users#custom"
end
You should avoid the use of match though, since it will be deprecated in Rails 4. Try this instead
resources :users do
get :custom, on: :member
end
get is the verb, :custom the route and on: :member means that you are looking for a /users/:id/custom route instead of a /users/custom one. If you are looking for the latter, do this:
resources :users do
get :custom, on: :collection
end
Another way to do it is like this, which I prefer:
resources :users do
get 'custom', on: :collection
end
That gives you a route of /users/custom. If you were do use on: :member, then it would give you a route of /users/:id/custom.
You can also use a block for defining multiple custom actions for collections or members.
For example:
resources :users do
collection do
get 'custom'
post 'some_other_method'
end
member do
get 'some_action'
end
end
I have a nested route in rails, and I need to change the name of the :id, I don't want that :id because I haven an other field to use as parameter... I've been googling around but couldn't find a way of doing this... Any idea?
I have:
resources :user do
resources :elements, :only=>[:create,:destroy]
end
and a rake routes generates:
user_elements POST /users/:user_id/elements(.:format) elements#create
user_elements DELETE /users/:user_id/elements/:id(.:format) elements#destroy
And I need something like
user_elements POST /users/:user_id/elements(.:format) elements#create
user_elements DELETE /users/:user_id/elements/:CHANGED(.:format) elements#destroy
Thanks!!
I would recommend against changing the convention. You will probably need to declare the routes manually.
That said, something like this would probably work:
resources :users do
post 'elements(.:format)' => 'elements#create'
delete 'elements/:changed(.:format)' => 'elements#destroy'
end
match "/users/:user_id/elements/:CHANGED(.:format)" => 'elements#destroy'
This can do it!
I created a Single table inheritance model in my model file and am having difficulty with the routing. When I use :as in my resource, it renames my named path.
Model file:
class Account < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :user
end
class AdvertiserAccount < Account
end
class PublisherAccount < Account
end
Routes.rb
resources :advertiser_accounts, :as => "accounts" do
resources :campaigns
end
I used :as in my routes because it is a single table inheritance and I want to pass the account_id and not the advertiser_account_id. My link is http://127.0.0.1:3000/advertiser_accounts/1/campaigns
/advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/:id(.:format)
However, using :as renames my named path from advertiser_account_campaigns to account_campaigns. My route looks like
account_campaigns GET /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns(.:format) campaigns#index
So when I create a new item using form_for, I would get "undefined method `advertiser_account_campaigns_path'"
Edited: current hacked solution
A hack around way that I am using is to duplicate the code in the routes file. Anyone have suggestions?
resources :advertiser_accounts, :as => "accounts" do
resources :campaigns
end
resources :advertiser_accounts do
resources :campaigns
end
If you run "rake routes" with your setup you'll see this:
account_campaigns GET /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns(.:format) campaigns#index
POST /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns(.:format) campaigns#create
new_account_campaign GET /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/new(.:format) campaigns#new
edit_account_campaign GET /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/:id/edit(.:format) campaigns#edit
account_campaign GET /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/:id(.:format) campaigns#show
PUT /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/:id(.:format) campaigns#update
DELETE /advertiser_accounts/:account_id/campaigns/:id(.:format) campaigns#destroy
accounts GET /advertiser_accounts(.:format) advertiser_accounts#index
POST /advertiser_accounts(.:format) advertiser_accounts#create
new_account GET /advertiser_accounts/new(.:format) advertiser_accounts#new
edit_account GET /advertiser_accounts/:id/edit(.:format) advertiser_accounts#edit
account GET /advertiser_accounts/:id(.:format) advertiser_accounts#show
PUT /advertiser_accounts/:id(.:format) advertiser_accounts#update
DELETE /advertiser_accounts/:id(.:format) advertiser_accounts#destroy
So you should use "account_campaingns_path" in this setup, the ":as" actually changes the calls in the code not the paths in the url. If you want to change the paths you should use ":path =>" rather than ":as =>".
The Rails guide on routing also shows some examples with ":as" and ":path" and the resulting paths and helpers, you'll need to search a bit because think they only use in in examples explaining other cases.
Edit: rereading your question, I think you may also want to look at member routes, I'm not sure if that's what you want to mean with it being a single inheritance and not wanting to pass the advertiser_account's ':account_id'?
My controller is using the default RESTful routes for creating, adding, editing etc
I want to change the default :id to use :guuid. So what I did was:
# routes.rb
resources :posts
# Post Model
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
def to_param # overridden
guuid
end
end
This works but my modifed REST controller code has something like this
def show
#post = Post.find_by_guuid(params[:id])
#title = "Review"
respond_to do |format|
format.html # show.html.erb
end
end
When I see this this code ..
Post.find_by_guuid(params[:id])
it would seem wrong but it works.
I don't understand why I can't write it out like this:
Post.find_by_guuid(params[:guuid])
Why do I still have to pass in the params[:id] when I'm not using it?
Looking for feedback on whether my approach is correct or anything else to consider.
Even though it works it doesn't always mean it's right.
Type rake routes in your console, and check the output of the routes. You'll see the fragment ':id' in some of them, that's where the params[:id] comes from. It's a rails convention : when you use resources in your routes, the parameter is named id. I don't know if you can change it (while keeping resources; otherwise you could just go with matching rules), but you shouldn't anyway : even if it seems not very logic, it actually has sense, once your understand how rails routing works.
I have a double namespace situation, where my controllers look like this:
CandidateController
Candidate::PerformanceController
Candidate::Performance::ReviewController
In Rails 2, I was able to use redirect_to from the Candidate::Performance::ReviewController controller in order to redirect to an action in the CandidateController, like so:
class Candidate::Performance::ReviewController < ApplicationController
before_filter :ensure_manager
# ...
def ensure_manager
if !current_user.manager?
flash[:warning] = t(:must_be_manager)
redirect_to :controller => '/candidate', :action => :index
end
end
end
The / in controller => '/candidate' would allow Rails to redirect from app.com/performance/reviews to app.com/candidate.
However, this seems to not work the same in Rails 3.1. Instead, my redirect_to goes to app.com/candidate//candidate. What is the correct way to specify a "absolute" controller within a redirect_to hash (ie. without using a path helper)?
Update: I know this would be infinitely easier if I just use named route helpers (ie. candidate_path). Unfortunately, there is a lot of legacy code in our codebase which doesn't use RESTful routing and instead uses the default "catch-all" route; ie. we have a lot of actions with no named route to fallback on.
I wonder if something else is wrong. In the doc:
In particular, a leading slash ensures no namespace is assumed. Thus,
while url_for :controller => ‘users‘ may resolve to
Admin::UsersController if the current controller lives under that
module, url_for :controller => ’/users‘ ensures you link to
::UsersController no matter what.
And I don't think it changed...
Also, shouldn't the catch-all routes be after the default routes in your config?
I think that redirect_to :controller => ... uses url_for to build the url, so in the end, if your custom routes catches /candidates, I don't really see the difference.
Some people have the same problem: https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/2575
Patching actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb line 434
as follows fixes this: if !named_route && different_controller? &&
!controller.starts_with?('/')
If anyone else runs into this problem, it seems to be a known issue (unsure whether they consider it a bug or not, given the lack of response on the issue page from anyone working on Rails).
Until they patch it (assuming they do), I've added the following little monkey patch into an initializer, based on the code given in the original post of that issue:
module ActionDispatch
module Routing
class RouteSet
class Generator
def use_relative_controller_with_absolute_paths!
return if controller.starts_with?('/')
use_relative_controller_without_absolute_paths!
end
alias_method_chain :use_relative_controller!, :absolute_paths
end
end
end
end
Hope this can help someone else!
Update: It seems that this was fixed in Rails here.