I''m expecting a negative answer, but it''s worth a shot. I''m building a project in rails based on an existing real-world model where they use the term ''action'' all the time. Actions are heavily ingrained in a pretty much unavoidable way. Of course, I want to create a controller called ''action'' but cannot. Is there *any* way around this? It looks like if it comes down to rails vs changing the use of the word ''action'' for my client''s entire operation, rails might lose. And then my life would suck. erm .. HELP! :) drew.
Can''t you just set up a route for this? On Jul 13, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Drew McLellan wrote:> I''m expecting a negative answer, but it''s worth a shot. > > I''m building a project in rails based on an existing real-world > model where they use the term ''action'' all the time. Actions are > heavily ingrained in a pretty much unavoidable way. > > Of course, I want to create a controller called ''action'' but cannot. > > Is there *any* way around this? It looks like if it comes down to > rails vs changing the use of the word ''action'' for my client''s > entire operation, rails might lose. And then my life would suck. > > erm .. HELP! :) > > > drew. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
<reads up on routes /> Ok, that''s a way around it. Any reason why that might not work? I really need to get myself up-to-date with all this. Still running 0.5 here. drew. On 13 Jul 2005, at 22:48, Toby Boudreaux wrote:> Can''t you just set up a route for this? > > > On Jul 13, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Drew McLellan wrote: > > >> I''m expecting a negative answer, but it''s worth a shot. >> >> I''m building a project in rails based on an existing real-world >> model where they use the term ''action'' all the time. Actions are >> heavily ingrained in a pretty much unavoidable way. >> >> Of course, I want to create a controller called ''action'' but cannot. >> >> Is there *any* way around this? It looks like if it comes down to >> rails vs changing the use of the word ''action'' for my client''s >> entire operation, rails might lose. And then my life would suck. >> >> erm .. HELP! :) >> >> >> drew. >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
> I really need to get myself up-to-date with all this. Still running > 0.5 here.You are using rails 0.5? -- Tobi http://www.snowdevil.ca - Snowboards that don''t suck http://typo.leetsoft.com - Open source weblog engine http://blog.leetsoft.com - Technical weblog
On 7/14/05, Drew McLellan <lists-JNb37YQQ9RcVubzFLznqig@public.gmane.org> wrote:> I''m expecting a negative answer, but it''s worth a shot. > > I''m building a project in rails based on an existing real-world model > where they use the term ''action'' all the time. Actions are heavily > ingrained in a pretty much unavoidable way. > > Of course, I want to create a controller called ''action'' but cannot. > > Is there *any* way around this? It looks like if it comes down to > rails vs changing the use of the word ''action'' for my client''s entire > operation, rails might lose. And then my life would suck. > > erm .. HELP! :)Why does the name of the controller matter so much? Call the model something like ClientAction or some other name for it. As for the controller, call it whatever you like, they don''t correspond one to one with models. -- Cheers Koz
On 13 Jul 2005, at 23:10, Tobias Luetke wrote:>> I really need to get myself up-to-date with all this. Still running >> 0.5 here. >> > > You are using rails 0.5?I was until today. Now I''m up-to-date. drew.
On Jul 13, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Drew McLellan wrote:>> You are using rails 0.5? >> > > I was until today. Now I''m up-to-date. >Wow. Wow, wow. You''re one of the good ol'' original Railers, aren''t you? That''s going to take a lot of "how to upgrade from 0.8 to 0.8.5" "how to upgrade from 0.8.5 to 9.0" etc. docs :) Duane Johnson (canadaduane)
On 14 Jul 2005, at 03:58, Duane Johnson wrote:> On Jul 13, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Drew McLellan wrote: > >>> You are using rails 0.5? >>> >>> >> >> I was until today. Now I''m up-to-date. >> >> > > Wow. > > Wow, wow. You''re one of the good ol'' original Railers, aren''t > you? That''s going to take a lot of "how to upgrade from 0.8 to > 0.8.5" "how to upgrade from 0.8.5 to 9.0" etc. docs :)I figured it was easier to just start over! :) drew.