Rails - Dec 2006 - Rest. _url vs _path

Hello people!

Can someone explain what the difference between the .*_url and .*_path
named routes generate by rest is?
http://cheat.errtheblog.com/b (actually down at the moment) mentions
the following (taken from peepcode.com, yay topfunky!)

"Each method also has a counterpart ending in _url that includes the
protocol,
  domain, and port."
which I dont quite get, I mean no matter wich ones I use (in dev mode)
produce the same links. could someone rephrase/explain that?

many thanks && happy new year!
Spyros


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

I believe that _url generates things like "
http://example.com/controller/action" and _path generates
"/controller/action"

Mark

On 12/31/06, spyridon.vasileiadis-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org <
spyridon.vasileiadis-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> Hello people!
>
> Can someone explain what the difference between the .*_url and .*_path
> named routes generate by rest is?
> http://cheat.errtheblog.com/b (actually down at the moment) mentions
> the following (taken from peepcode.com, yay topfunky!)
>
> "Each method also has a counterpart ending in _url that includes the
> protocol,
>   domain, and port."
> which I dont quite get, I mean no matter wich ones I use (in dev mode)
> produce the same links. could someone rephrase/explain that?
>
> many thanks && happy new year!
> Spyros
>
>
> >
>

-- 
Mark Van Holstyn
mvanholstyn-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
http://lotswholetime.com

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

yeah but like i said, in the end (ie browser) a complete link is
displayed. so does it make a difference to use path instead of url,
since path does get its prefix (domain+port) by rails anyway? can it be
that it makes a difference while in production rather than dev mode?

On Dec 31, 9:54 pm, "Mark Van Holstyn"
<mvett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> I believe that _url generates things like
"http://example.com/controller/action" and _path generates
> "/controller/action"
>
> Mark
>
> On 12/31/06, spyridon.vasileia...-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org
<
>
>
>
> spyridon.vasileia...-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > Hello people!
>
> > Can someone explain what the difference between the .*_url and .*_path
> > named routes generate by rest is?
> >http://cheat.errtheblog.com/b(actually down at the moment) mentions
> > the following (taken from peepcode.com, yay topfunky!)
>
> > "Each method also has a counterpart ending in _url that includes
the
> > protocol,
> >   domain, and port."
> > which I dont quite get, I mean no matter wich ones I use (in dev mode)
> > produce the same links. could someone rephrase/explain that?
>
> > many thanks && happy new year!
> > Spyros--
> Mark Van Holstyn
> mvanhols...-Re5JQEeQqe80Tx58lXaADg@public.gmane.org://lotswholetime.com

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

> yeah but like i said, in the end (ie browser) a complete link is
> displayed. so does it make a difference to use path instead of url,
> since path does get its prefix (domain+port) by rails anyway? can it be
> that it makes a difference while in production rather than dev mode?
I don''t think production/dev mode makes any difference. But there are
cases where you''ll need one and not the other. There may be other
examples, but it makes a difference when you''re passing a named route
to the current_page? method. You''d want to use _path in that case; _url
won''t work. (It''s because of the way current_page? compares
using
url_for and the request uri.)

-TJ


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---