I'm finding myself writing very similar code in two places, once to define a (virtual) boolean attribute on a model, and once to define a scope to find records that match that condition. In essence,
scope :something, where(some_complex_conditions)
def something?
some_complex_conditions
end
A simple example: I'm modelling a club membership; a Member pays a Fee, which is valid only in a certain year.
class Member < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :payments
has_many :fees, :through => :payments
scope :current, joins(:fees).merge(Fee.current)
def current?
fees.current.exists?
end
end
class Fee < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :payments
has_many :members, :through => :payments
scope :current, where(:year => Time.now.year)
def current?
year == Time.now.year
end
end
Is there a DRYer way to write a scopes that make use of virtual attributes (or, alternatively, to determine whether a model is matched by the conditions of a scope)?
I'm pretty new to Rails so please do point out if I'm doing something stupid!
This in not an answer to the question, but your code has a bug (in case you use something similar in production): Time.now.year will return the year the server was started. You want to run this scope in a lambda to have it behave as expected.
scope :current, lambda { where(:year => Time.now.year) }
No, there's no better way to do what you're trying to do (other than to take note of Geraud's comment). In your scope you're defining a class-level filter which will generate SQL to be used in restricting the results your finders return, in the attribute you're defining an instance-level test to be run on a specific instance of this class.
Yes, the code is similar, but it's performing different functions in different contexts.
Yes, you can use one or more parameters with a lambda in your scopes. Suppose that you have a set of items, and you want to get back those that are either 'Boot' or 'Helmet' :
scope :item_type, lambda { |item_type|
where("game_items.item_type = ?", item_type )
}
You can now do game_item.item_type('Boot') to get only the boots or game_item.item_type('Helmet') to get only the helmets. The same applies in your case. You can just have a parameter in your scope, in order to check one or more conditions on the same scope, in a DRYer way.
Related
I'm trying to create an attribute in my select statement that depends on whether or not an association exists. I'm not sure if it's possible with a single query, and the goal is to not have to iterate a list afterward.
Here is the structure.
class Project < ApplicationRecord
has_many :subscriptions
has_many :users, through: :subscriptions
end
class User < ApplicationRecord
has_many :subscriptions
has_many :projects, through: :subscriptions
end
class Subscription < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :project
belongs_to :user
end
Knowing a project, the goal of the query is to return ALL users and include on them a new attribute call subscribed - denoting whether or not they are subscribed.
non-working code (pseudo code):
project = Project.find_by(name: 'has_subscribers')
query = 'users.*, (subscriptions.project_id = ?) AS subscribed'
users = User.includes(:subscriptions).select(query, project.id)
user.first.subscribed
# => true or false
I'm open to whether or not there is a better way of going about this. However, the information is:
You know the project record.
You query a list of ALL users
Each user record has a subscribed attribute, denoting whether its
subscribed to the given project
Solution:
I was able to figure out a straight forward solution using the bool_or aggregate method. Coalesce ensures that the value returned is false instead of nil, should no subscriptions exists.
query = "users.*, COALESCE(bool_or(subscriptions.project_id = '#{project_id}'::uuid), false) as subscribed"
User.left_outer_joins(:subscriptions)
.select(query)
.group('users.id')
Yep, you can do this:
User.joins(:projects).select(Arel.star, Subscription.arel_table[:project_id])
Which will result in a SQL query like this:
SELECT *, "subscriptions"."project_id" FROM "users" INNER JOIN "subscriptions" ON "subscriptions"."user_ud" = "users"."id";
If you want to specify a specific project (i.e. use an expression), you can do it with Arel like this:
User.joins(:projects).select(Arel.star, Subscription.arel_table[:project_id].eq(42))
Unfortunately, you won't have a column name alias, and you can't call as on an Arel::Nodes::Equality instance. I don't know enough about the internals of Arel to have a way out of that box. But you can do this if you want the composability of Arel (e.g. if this is going to be something that needs to work with multiple models or columns):
User.joins(:projects).select(Arel.star, Subscription.arel_table[:project_id].eq(42).to_sql + " as has_project")
This is a bit clunky, but it works and provides a user.has_project method that returns a boolean. You can pretty it up like so:
class User
scope :with_project_status, lambda do |project_id|
has_project =
Subscription.arel_table[:project_id].
eq(project_id).to_sql + " as has_project"
joins(:projects).select(Arel.star, has_project)
end
end
User.with_project_status(42).where(active: true)
User has_many constructusers, the latter being a join table for a has_many :through relationship to Construct. For the application purposes, the boolean roles are defined in the join table (constructusers.manager, constructusers.operator, etc.), while admin is a user attribute.
So when it comes time to define the policies on the actions the following throws a no method error for 'manager', while a relationship is recognised ActiveRecord::Relation:0x000001035c4370
def show?
user.admin? or user.constructusers.manager?
end
if the relationship (I assume the proper one) is correct, why is there no recognition of the boolean attribute?
As per comment below, for the simple reason that is plural. Thus filtering requires:
Constructuser.where(['construct_id = ? and user_id = ?', params[:id], current_user]).first
...which is running in the controller and impacts the view. Nonetheless, for proper Pundit handling, this needs to be factored out... still de application_controller in a before filter to set that attribute. However a before_filter :set_constructuser_manager with that find condition, with nil case handling, still has no impact when stating the policy
def show?
set_constructuser_manager?
end
Update: as per comment below. Pundit class private method
def contractorconstruct
#contructs = Construct.where(['constructusers.user_id = ?', user]).joins(:users).all
#contractorconstruct ||= Contractor.where(['construct_id IN (?)', #contructs]).first
end
and action rule
|| contractorconstruct?
returns no method error.
manager? will be a method on an instance of Constructuser, not on the relation. Think about what you are asking, "Is this constructusers a manager?" - it makes no sense. How would the computer know what constructuser you are talking about?
If a user has_many constructusers, in order to use manager? you need to find the instance you are concerned about. If this is in the ConstructPolicy, then you need to find the specific constructuser that links user to the construct that you are authorizing, then check if that single constructuser is manager?.
If you are in the Construct controller, you'll have something like
class ConstructsController
before_action :set_construct
def show
authorize #construct
# ...
end
# ...
end
In your policy then, user will be the current user and record will be #construct.
class ConstructPolicy
def show?
user.admin? || constructuser.manage?
end
private
def constructuser
#constructuser ||= Constructuser.find_by(user_id: user, construct_id: record)
end
end
I have two models that are connected via a has_many/belongs_to association:
Class Project < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :tasks
end
Class Tasks < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :project
end
Each of the tasks are tagged with a HABTM relationship:
Class Tasks < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :project
has_and_belongs_to_many :tags
end
I am trying to get a list of projects based on a tag id. I can get a list of projects that have tasks with a specific tag by using a class method on my Project model:
def by_tag(tag_id)
Project.joins(:tasks => :tags).where(:tags => {:id = tag_id})
end
Ideally, I'm looking to be able to list all the projects and their associated tasks for a given tag in my view. I could normally get a list of tasks belonging to a given project by using project.tasks if I used a typical find with project like Project.find(1).
However, when I try project.tasks on results found using my new class method Project.by_tag(1), I get a "NoMethodError: Undefined Method 'tasks'" error.
I looked into Named Scopes to get the Project by Tag results but it seems like people are moving away from that approach in favor of class methods. Is that true?
On your project model you need to add it to the class not the instance. Also note that this raises the self object to the class so you can eliminate "Project." unless you want to be explicit.
class << self
def by_tag(tag_id)
joins(:tasks => :tags).where(:tags => {:id = tag_id})
end
end
There is always debate over what is the best method. I myself prefer whatever gets the job done quicker. I like scopes personally but to each his own.
I'd like to make a dynamic named scope in rails 3 conditional on the arguments passed in. For example:
class Message < AR::Base
scope :by_users, lambda {|user_ids| where(:user_id => user_ids) }
end
Message.by_users(user_ids)
However, I'd like to be able to call this scope even with an empty array of user_ids, and in that case not apply the where. The reason I want to do this inside the scope is I'm going to be chaining several of these together.
How do I make this work?
To answer your question you can do:
scope :by_users, lambda {|user_ids|
where(:user_id => user_ids) unless user_ids.empty?
}
However
I normally just use scope for simple operations(for readability and maintainability), anything after that and I just use class methods, so something like:
class Message < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.by_users(users_id)
if user_ids.empty?
scoped
else
where(:user_id => users_id)
end
end
end
This will work in Rails 3 because where actually returns an ActiveRecord::Relation, in which you can chain more queries.
I'm also using #scoped, which will return an anonymous scope, which will allow you to chain queries.
In the end, it is up to you. I'm just giving you options.
Suppose I have the following model relationship:
class Player < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :cards
end
class Card < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :player
end
I know from this question that Rails will return me a copy of the object representing a database row, meaning that:
p = Player.find(:first)
c = p.cards[0]
c.player.object_id == p.object_id # => false
...and therefore if the Player model modifies self, and the Card model modifies self.player in the same request, then the modifications won't take any notice of each other and the last-saved one will overwrite the others.
I'd like to work around this (presumably with some form of caching), so that all requests for a Player with a given id would return the same object (identical object_ids), thereby allowing both models to edit the same object without having to perform a database save-and-reload. I have three questions:
Is there already a plugin or gem to do this?
Are there good reasons why I shouldn't do this?
Can anyone give me some pointers on how to go about doing this?
This is supported in Rails 3.x. You can use the :inverse_of option for the has_many association for example. Documentation here (search for :inverse_of and Bi-directional associations).