Betternestedset talk - Dec 2006 - def parent=(new_parent)

Hi,

Thanks for better_nested_set first. Is is REALLY better!

I read about "add_child" that will be deprecated soon, replaced by
"move_to_child_of". My english is not that fantastic, but I''m
a little bit puzzled when I read:

node.move_to_child_of(another_node)

"Move the node to the child of a new node". It gives me the impression
my node will have as a parent a child of the new node. Maybe en english speaker
can help here. Maybe "move_as_child_of" instead?

What do you think of the following:

  def parent=(new_parent)
    self.move_to_child_of(new_parent)
  end

Since "def parent" already exists, API get symmetrical. And for me, it
gets clear!

----------------------------------
Philippe Lang, Ing. Dipl. EPFL
Attik System
rte de la Fonderie 2
1700 Fribourg
Switzerland
http://www.attiksystem.ch

Tel  : +41 (26) 422 13 75
Fax  : +41 (26) 422 13 76  
Skype: philippe.lang
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3125 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/betternestedset-talk/attachments/20061211/8020b602/attachment.bin

Hi Philippe,
Thanks for the encouraging words!

I''m a native english speaker, and I agree that move_to_child_of(node)
isn''t
as clear as parent=(node). However, it is consistent with the other move_to
methods.

Also, in normal ActiveRecord associations, when you call parent=, the change
doesn''t take effect until the object is saved, but the move_to methods
are
immediate, and lose any unsaved changes in the object. I like the fact that
the move_to methods remind the user that they cause an immediate change in
tree structure.

I''ve updated the documentation to make it clearer what the method does.
It
now reads:

move_to_child_of(target)
"Make this node a child of target (you can pass an object or just an id).
Unsaved changes in either object will be lost. Raises
ActiveRecord::ActiveRecordError if it encounters a problem."

Hopefully that helps. Please feel free to keep bugging us with feedback. In
fact, the current code (on rubyforge) needs beta-testers-- if you feel like
trying to break it, just:

script/plugin install svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/betternestedset/trunk

Cheers,
Krishna



On 12/11/06, Philippe Lang <philippe.lang at attiksystem.ch>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for better_nested_set first. Is is REALLY better!
>
> I read about "add_child" that will be deprecated soon, replaced
by
"move_to_child_of". My english is not that fantastic, but I''m
a little bit
puzzled when I read:
>
> node.move_to_child_of(another_node)
>
> "Move the node to the child of a new node". It gives me the
impression my
node will have as a parent a child of the new node. Maybe en english speaker
can help here. Maybe "move_as_child_of"
instead?
>
> What do you think of the following:
>
>   def parent=(new_parent)
>     self.move_to_child_of(new_parent)
>   end
>
> Since "def parent" already exists, API get symmetrical. And for
me, it
gets clear!
>
> ----------------------------------
> Philippe Lang, Ing. Dipl. EPFL
> Attik System
> rte de la Fonderie 2
> 1700 Fribourg
> Switzerland
> http://www.attiksystem.ch
>
> Tel  : +41 (26) 422 13 75
> Fax  : +41 (26) 422 13 76
> Skype: philippe.lang
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Betternestedset-talk mailing list
> Betternestedset-talk at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/betternestedset-talk
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/betternestedset-talk/attachments/20061212/2b9066d7/attachment.html