I'm on Rails 3 and on my 2nd Rails project (i.e. I'm a newbie). I am making a website with several locales, at the moment Swedish and US. I am using the I18n_routing gem to create localized url:s. I am also using the friendly_id gem to create better urls.
My problem: I cannot get my nested urls to be translated. They remain as the default-urls.
This is my routes.rb:
localized(I18n.available_locales, :verbose => true) do
resources :calculation_types, :only => [:show], :path => '' do
resources :calculations, :only => [:index, :show], :path => '' do
member do
put 'calculate_it'
get 'calculate_it', :redirect_me => true
get 'link'
end
end
end
end
localized(I18n.available_locales, :verbose => true) do
match 'searchresults' => 'home#search-results', :as => :searchresults
match 'about' => 'home#about', :as => :about
match 'advertise' => 'home#advertise', :as => :advertise
match 'terms' => 'home#terms', :as => :terms
match 'calculator' => 'home#calculator', :as => :calculator
match 'feedback' => 'home#feedback', :as => :feedback
end
This is a sample (cut) of my locale (for Swedish):
se:
named_routes_path:
about: 'om'
advertise: 'annonsera'
calculator: 'kalkylator'
feedback: 'feedback'
searchresults: 'sokresultat'
terms: 'anvandaranvisning'
resources:
accumulated-passive-income: "vardet-av-din-passiva-inkomst"
all-about-a-date: "allt-om-ett-datum"
area: "area"
average-speed: "genomsnittshastighet"
birthday-in-days: "fodelsedag-i-dagar"
These are some facts of the case:
The resources-translations include both "calculation_types" and "calculations".
I have tried several set-ups in the translation file.
The SECOND routing WORKS, the one with the "match", they also appear when I do rake routes.
I get no error messages. Everything works fine.
I am using friendly_id as the url-words. An example of a url could be http://local.domain.com:3000/diet/bmi where "diet" is calculation_type.friendly_id and bmi is calculation.friendly_id
I want help with:
- Why do the nested routes not show up as routes? Why are they not being created?
- How do I get this to work?
Do you need any more info to help me?
It seems like it is not a matter of I18n_routing after all since the words that should be translated are actually friendly_id:s. So, disregard the I18n_routing part of this problem and focus on the friendly_id-translation...
Related
I have routes listed as follows
resources :jobs do
resources :invoices, :only => [:show] do
get 'submit_invoice', :on => :member
end
end
So the middle route creates a url like /jobs/:job_id/invoices/:id/submit_invoice which is exactly what I want. However rails assigns the name submit_invoice_job_invoice to the path which is ugly and horrible to type.
How can I make the name just submit_invoice so that I can have submit_invoice_path and submit_invoice_url?
The answer should be:
get "/jobs/:job_id/invoices/:id/submit_invoice" => "invoices#submit_invoice",
:as => "submit_invoice"
resources :jobs do
resources :invoices, :only => [:show] do
get 'submit_invoice', :on => :member, :as => 'submit_invoice'
end
end
Use :as => 'routename' and invoke it as routename_path.
:)
I have following routes defined:
CyberTrackRails3::Application.routes.draw do
scope "(:locale)", :locale => /en|de|nl/ do
resources :login do
get 'index', on: :collection
get 'check', on: :collection
end
end
end
Now, url_for(:controller => 'login', :action => 'check'), gives me the correct url, en/login/check.
Using login_check_path however doesn't work. How do I make this work?
I've tried replacing get 'index', on: :collection with match 'check' => 'check' but that doesn't work. Neither does match 'check' => 'login#check'.
since you're adding an action to a resource, i think the automatically generated name is going to be reversed, ie 'check_logins_path' (see adding-more-restful-actions)
do you need login_check_path specifically? if so, you should be able to define the path outside of the resources :login block, ie
match '/login/check' => 'login#check', :via => :get, :as => 'login_check'
and like Fivell suggested, rake routes will show you the automatically generated name for a route.
I'm just struggling a few hours with a problem, that seems rather easy, but not for me and not for google :)
I put some routes via
scope :path => '/:mandate_key', :controller => :tasks do
get '/' => :index #mandate_path
match '/import' => "import#index"
match '/clearance' => "clearance#index"
end
So far, so ugly! I'm looking for a way to call different controllers (import and clearance) dependent on the second param. Something like this:
scope :path => '/:mandate_key', :controller => :tasks do
get '/' => :index
scope :path => ':task_key', :controller => %{'task_key'}
get '/' => :index
end
end
where :task_key should be recognized as params[:task_key] and the called controller should be the value of params[:task_key]
So if a click a link like http://some.url/a_mandate_key/import it should call the ImportController.
I'm sure that the solution will be simple, but finding is hard!
Sometimes one is looking for a highly complicated solution, but it could be so much easier:
scope :path => '/:mandate_key' do
get '/' => "tasks#index" #mandate_path
get '/import' => "import#index"
get '/clearance' => "clearance#index"
end
Calling http://localhost/mandate the controller 'mandate' is called an params[:mandate_key] provides 'mandate'
Calling http://localhost/mandate/import the controller 'import' is called an params[:controller] provides 'import'
Trying the easy way is often the best way :)
Thanks for your help, Bohdan!
you might add in the bottom of your routes match ':controller(/:action(/:id))' so any unknown url will be dispatched this way
How about
scope :path => '/:mandate_key', :controller => :tasks do
get '/' => :index #mandate_path
end
....
match ':mandate_key/:controller(/:action)'
first scope will match routes /:mandate_key/tasks and the second one /:mandate_key/:controller or /:mandate_key/:controller/:action however second part should be defined in the bottom of your routes.rb file otherwise it'll match wrong routes
Consider this as a challenge rather than its general approach. The reason I mention this is because, it is generally preferred to incorporate admin-accessible features into the public facing site. This is what's required:
Devise model for Users, visitors accessing the public facing site
Devise model for Admins
Namespace or scope the admin 'area' to /admin. Admins can only login from this route.
Users can sign up directly from the site's public facing landing page; they are not forced to visit /users/sign_up as per the default devise generated route.
Consider overriding the default devise controllers
Thanks,
Mike.
The following seems like I've made some progress in the right direction; this at least provides identical out-of-the-box devise functionality for both users and admins, with the custom routing,
match 'admin', :controller => 'admin'
namespace :admin do
# to be updated later...
end
devise_for :users
#devise_for :admins, :path => "admin" # this works but uses the default
# Devise::SessionController
devise_for :admins,
:controllers => {
:sessions => "admin/sessions",
:passwords => "admin/passwords",
:registrations => "admin/registrations" }, :path => "admin",
:skip => [:sessions, :passwords, :registrations] do
get 'admin/sign_in' => 'admin/sessions#new', :as => :new_admin_session
post 'admin/sign_in' => 'admin/sessions#create', :as => :admin_session
get 'admin/sign_out' => 'admin/sessions#destroy', :as => :destroy_admin_session
get 'admin/sign_up' => 'admin/registrations#new', :as => :new_admin_registration
get 'admin/account' => 'admin/registrations#edit', :as => :edit_admin_registration
post 'admin/account' => 'admin/registrations#create', :as => :admin_registration
get 'admin/cancel' => 'admin/registrations#cancel', :as => :cancel_admin_registration
put 'admin/account' => 'admin/registrations#update'
delete 'admin/account' => 'admin/registrations#destroy'
post 'admin/password' => 'admin/passwords#create', :as => :admin_password
get 'admin/password/new' => 'admin/passwords#new', :as => :new_admin_password
get 'admin/password/edit' => 'admin/passwords#edit', :as => :edit_admin_password
put 'admin/password' => 'admin/passwords#update'
end
Ideas?
caveat: in this example, I've included the :registerable devise module in the Admin model just for testing during development. The sign_up route will, ultimately, be removed.
Much searching yielded (mind the pun) the following blog post that seems to indicate overriding a devise controller requires the re-mapping of all its specified 'HTTP verbs' as it were; this makes sense as unmapped ones would be handled by the default devise controller.
If anyone has more experience working with multiple devise models and the separated admin approach, I would be very much interested in your thoughts and suggestions!
Ok, I'm relatively new to rails and am working through the book Rails for PHP programmers. To make things interesting I'm using Rails 3 and haml to work through the book, and the book is written using Rails 2.X and erb so some of the examples are outdated.
To the question:
The route example in the book is
map.presentation 'meetings/:meeting_id/presentations/:action/:id',
:controller => "presentations",
:action => "show",
:meeting_id => /\d+/
So that was a pre-Rails 3 route. My adaptation of the above into a Rails 3 route is:
match 'meetings/:meeting_id/presentations/:action/:id', :to => 'presentations#show', :constraints => {:id => /\d/}
My adaptation works for the destroy action, but not for the edit action... and due to my inexperience I don't know what I'm doing wrong. From the article here (http://www.engineyard.com/blog/2010/the-lowdown-on-routes-in-rails-3/) it looks like I'm doing it right, but something isn't right.
The link_to helpers that produce the urls are as follows
= link_to 'edit', :controller => 'presentations',
:action => 'edit',
:meeting_id => presentation.meeting.id,
:id => presentation.id
# Incorrectly Produces: http://localhost:3000/presentations/edit?meeting_id=2&id=1
= link_to 'destroy', { :controller => 'presentations',
:action => 'destroy',
:meeting_id => presentation.meeting.id,
:id => presentation.id },
:confirm => 'Are you sure?',
:method => :delete
# Correctly Produces: http://localhost:3000/meetings/2/presentations/destroy/1
Your help would go a long way to clearing up my routing haziness. Thanks so much!
EDIT
Here's the non-working routes.rb file in its entirety:
UserGroup::Application.routes.draw do
get "presentations/new"
get "presentations/edit"
get "sessions/new"
get "users/index"
get "users/show"
get "users/new"
get "users/edit"
get "meetings/index"
match '/meetings/show/:id', :to => 'meetings#show', :as => 'meeting'
match '/meetings/new', :to => 'meetings#new', :as => 'new_meeting'
match '/meetings/edit/:id', :to => 'meetings#edit', :as => 'edit_meeting'
match 'meetings/:meeting_id/presentations/:action/:id', :to => 'presentations', :constraints => {:id => /\d/}
#default route
match ':controller(/:action(/:id(.:format)))'
end
EDIT 2
Thanks to codykrieger I took a look at the rest of the routes file (I know, duh right?). Apparently, all those get "..." routes are added when using the rails generator and help to make some default connections in the app. I commented out the get "presentations/edit" line and, wonder of wonders, my routing adaptation actually does work.
This works:
UserGroup::Application.routes.draw do
get "presentations/new"
#get "presentations/edit"
get "sessions/new"
get "users/index"
get "users/show"
get "users/new"
get "users/edit"
get "meetings/index"
match '/meetings/show/:id', :to => 'meetings#show', :as => 'meeting'
match '/meetings/new', :to => 'meetings#new', :as => 'new_meeting'
match '/meetings/edit/:id', :to => 'meetings#edit', :as => 'edit_meeting'
match 'meetings/:meeting_id/presentations/:action/:id', :to => 'presentations', :constraints => {:id => /\d/}
#default route
match ':controller(/:action(/:id(.:format)))'
end
I played around with the order of the routes in the file and also found that if I put my route above all the auto-generated routes, without commenting out the get "presentations/edit" line, my route still has the intended effect.
This also works:
UserGroup::Application.routes.draw do
match 'meetings/:meeting_id/presentations/:action/:id', :to => 'presentations', :constraints => {:id => /\d/}
get "presentations/new"
get "presentations/edit"
get "sessions/new"
get "users/index"
get "users/show"
get "users/new"
get "users/edit"
get "meetings/index"
match '/meetings/show/:id', :to => 'meetings#show', :as => 'meeting'
match '/meetings/new', :to => 'meetings#new', :as => 'new_meeting'
match '/meetings/edit/:id', :to => 'meetings#edit', :as => 'edit_meeting'
#default route
match ':controller(/:action(/:id(.:format)))'
end
I'm thinking that the latter is the better way to go and I should make my custom routing declarations above the standard generated ones, but I'm not sure. If someone out there wants to comment on which practice is better, or if it's better to entirely remove the generated ones if I want to specify my own, I'd love to hear it.
Thanks all :)
Routing is done on a first match basis (top to bottom) in the routes.rb file.
So you can keep all routes as you have done above if you want, and Rails will use the first one that matches. However, its messy, potentially buggy and totally unnecessary. So the "match..." lines in your code should be enough, and you can remove the "get..." lines.
Furthermore, your "match...presentations...." line has a bug, it should be
...{:id => /\d+/}
else it will validate only 1-digit length ids.
Finally, as far as your overall routes.rb is concerned, you do not need to do
link_to 'edit', :controller => 'presentations',
:action => 'edit',
:meeting_id => presentation.meeting.id,
:id => presentation.id
Instead, you should use edit_meeting_path, new_meeting_path etc. For instance
<%= link_to "New meeting", new_meeting_path %>
<%= link_to "Edit meeting", edit_meeting_path(#meeting) %>
Finally, you should read Rails Routing from the Outside In for best practices on how to design nested routes etc.