Rails - Jul 2005 - Plural or singluar?

Hi,

The tutorial I''ve just been following (the OnLamp one) seems to think
that if you have:
a database table called ''recipes''
then the model will be called ''recipe''
the url will be ''recipe''
and for the purposes of the generate script, it''s
''Recipe''

On the other hand, ''generate scaffold Recipe'' seems to think
that the
url will be plural, ''recipes'', and puts the templates under
view/recipes.

Is this something that changed between versions? I feel there''s a case
for both, at least when it comes to urls, because "recipe/10/show"
follows nicely from "recipes/list" - but is probably too clever by
half.

Is there any easy way to make my application plural-agnostic, and allow
''recipe'' or ''recipes'' in the url (short of
using mod_rewrite)?

cheers,
Tom Weissmann


	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

> The tutorial I''ve just been following (the OnLamp one) seems to
think
> that if you have:
> a database table called ''recipes''
> then the model will be called ''recipe''
> the url will be ''recipe''
> and for the purposes of the generate script, it''s
''Recipe''
> 
> On the other hand, ''generate scaffold Recipe'' seems to
think that the
> url will be plural, ''recipes'', and puts the templates
under
> view/recipes.
> 
> Is this something that changed between versions? I feel there''s a
case
> for both, at least when it comes to urls, because
"recipe/10/show"
> follows nicely from "recipes/list" - but is probably too clever
by half.
> 
> Is there any easy way to make my application plural-agnostic, and allow
> ''recipe'' or ''recipes'' in the url (short
of using mod_rewrite)?
Use routes.

map.connect ''recipe/:id/:action'', :controller =>
''recipes'', :action => :show

Personally, I tend to name my controllers after the function it''s
performing, not what model(s) it''s using.


-- 
rick
http://techno-weenie.net