Rails - Oct 2009 - Simple question on rails routing

How does the :default option differ from just setting the key value
pair at the end of the route?

For example:

map.connect ''index/test/:foo/:bar'', :controller =>
''index'', :action =>
''test'', :defaults => { :foo => ''foo'',
:bar => ''bar'' }

map.connect ''index/test/:foo/:bar'', :controller =>
''index'', :action =>
''test'',  :foo => ''foo'', :bar =>
''bar''

What is the point of using defaults? They both seem to work as
intended? Thank you


Note: I looked at the Ruby on Rails Routing guide and I tried the
following example from (http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html)

map.connect ''photos/:id'', :controller =>
''photos'', :action =>
''show'',  :defaults => { :format =>
''jpg'' }

and I get the following error:

/Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/
routing/builder.rb:107:in `assign_route_options'': format: No matching
segment exists; cannot assign default (ArgumentError)

It looks like I need to actually have :format defined as part of the
url. Did something change recently? I am using rails 2.3.2

RubyOnRailsNoob wrote:
[...]
> Note: I looked at the Ruby on Rails Routing guide and I tried the
> following example from (http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html)
> 
> map.connect ''photos/:id'', :controller =>
''photos'', :action =>
> ''show'',  :defaults => { :format =>
''jpg'' }
> 
> and I get the following error:
> 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/
> routing/builder.rb:107:in `assign_route_options'': format: No
matching
> segment exists; cannot assign default (ArgumentError)
> 
> It looks like I need to actually have :format defined as part of the
> url. Did something change recently? I am using rails 2.3.2
:format became a special routing parameter (like :controller and 
:action) in 2.3, but the guides should take that into account...

Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.