I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. namespace) would cost significant amount of work. I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in future version of rails. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Guys I wonder if you ever come across a guy called RSL. He keeps telling ppl the first rule of programming is Its All Your Fault, with the codinghorror page enclosed. I am very alleged by him as he doesn''t present solution to people, and indeed just try to insult people with this ITS ALL YOUR FAULT MAN. Even the comment which I think I have put reasonable effort to discuss about scaffold problem, I am being insulted on my blog. I feel disappointed about such member in rails, despite he did finally help on fixing a weird problem on my leopard rails (for some reason the gem source for rubyonrails is being added). Sorry if I try to write something a bit personal here, but I just feel I should voice it out. On Apr 9, 12:02 am, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look:http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > future version of rails.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
You mean the one who helped you sort out the fact that you added gems.rubyonrails.org to yr rubygems sources the other day and showed you how to remove it? That guy? Yes, I''ve run into him. You have a little song called "gimmegimmegimme, it''s never my fault, fix my problems for free, and make sure you stroke my ego too". It''s really catchy apparently as a lot of people sing it. I still stand by my assertion that the first rule of programming _is_ that it''s your fault. When you come whining into help forums, chat rooms, and other places asserting that a tool that works for other people is broken... You''re showing a hubris that far surpasses the good kind advocated by Larry Wall [ http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?LazinessImpatienceHubris]. Code does not magically change itself. Programming is science not sorcery. It''s always the programmer''s fault. Especially when 1. you''re an admitted new user stuck on the "hard" parts of scaffolding and 2. the problem isn''t universal. RSL On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:57 AM, goodwill <william.yeung.hk-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Guys I wonder if you ever come across a guy called RSL. He keeps > telling ppl the first rule of programming is Its All Your Fault, with > the codinghorror page enclosed. I am very alleged by him as he doesn''t > present solution to people, and indeed just try to insult people with > this ITS ALL YOUR FAULT MAN. Even the comment which I think I have put > reasonable effort to discuss about scaffold problem, I am being > insulted on my blog. I feel disappointed about such member in rails, > despite he did finally help on fixing a weird problem on my leopard > rails (for some reason the gem source for rubyonrails is being > added). > > Sorry if I try to write something a bit personal here, but I just feel > I should voice it out. > > On Apr 9, 12:02 am, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: > http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > > future version of rails. > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:27 PM, goodwill <william.yeung.hk-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Guys I wonder if you ever come across a guy called RSL.Yes.> He keeps > telling ppl the first rule of programming is Its All Your Fault,That''s because it is.> with > the codinghorror page enclosed.And with good reason.> I am very allegedCorrect word is "offended"> by him as he doesn''t > present solution to people,He does. As long as if you can''t google it or it''s something incredibly simple.> and indeed just try to insult people with > this ITS ALL YOUR FAULT MAN.That''s because it is. Even the comment which I think I have put> reasonable effort to discuss about scaffold problem, I am being > insulted on my blog. >The comments on your blog are subject to your approval. Delete them. It should be the button on the right. If you can''t find it, google it.> I feel disappointed about such member in rails,I don''t. rsl is a smart guy. He''s not helping you because what you''re asking can be googled.> > despite he did finally help on fixing a weird problem on my leopard > rails (for some reason the gem source for rubyonrails is being > added). > > Sorry if I try to write something a bit personal here, but I just feel > I should voice it out.No problem dude. Goodwill, I already posted the "Life Cycle of a Problem" as a comment to your blog, but I''ll repost it here: 1. Encounter the problem. 2. Google. 3. Google better. 4. Google harder, changing/removing keywords to get better results. Don''t paste the whole damn error, just perhaps the class name such as ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid. 5. Ask somebody. Format your sentences properly using correct english (not that you haven''t done this, just that some people''s english skills are not all that great) 6. Ask somebody else. 7. Post about it somewhere in detailed format. Don''t say "omg it''s broken!1!!!" Explain what "it" is, how it''s broken and what you were doing before it was broken. 8. Never get angry. Angry makes you unreasonable and makes you do silly things, such as formatting a hard drive or destroying a suburb. 9. Rejoice when it''s fixed. For those of you who don''t know, goodwill runs a blog: http://bugthis.blogspot.com/. He posts stuff on this blog, as all good bloggers do.> > > On Apr 9, 12:02 am, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: > http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > > future version of rails. > > >-- Ryan Bigg http://www.frozenplague.net Feel free to add me to MSN and/or GTalk as this email. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
The answer is simple - scaffolding in Rails 2.0 is what it is, and it''s not going to change. The main reason it won''t is that very few people actually use it. It''s not really designed for production, it makes BDD or TDD near impossible, and it often generates more than you need. Some people like the form generation that you got with the old scaffolding. I know I did, it was the only part of scaffolding I really liked because I find form generation to be tedious when I am working with existing databases. My solution was to develop a gem called scaffold_form_generator sudo gem install scaffold_form_generator Then given an existing model ruby script/generate scaffold_form User users Generates app/views/users/_form.html.erb app/views/users/new.html.erb app/views/users/edit.html.erb This has been useful to a few people and solved their pain points. My point here is that if you see something that Rails does that you disagree with, you have the power to change how it works, or use something different. Rails is opinionated and sometimes the opinions of the core team differ from mine. 95% of the time, we agree, but when we don''t, I just build something myself. On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:02 AM, goodwill <william.yeung.hk-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: > http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > future version of rails. > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
No I never feel its a good thing to delete somebody''s msg unless its some really dirty one. I don''t understand why you say its googling going to fix that viewpoint difference. I agree with you I have some misunderstanding on the namespace problem. But as Brian commented, I think he kinda feels what I am missing- sometimes some simple entity scaffold just save me some time (I know it may not be a lot). And if they do intend to push RESTful with the new scaffold, I think my comments worth consideration to patch it properly. so its going to be more useful. And for that problem I have asked, I just found its being asked in RubyonRails Talk but its not being answered, thats why I would start to seek help for #rubyonrails. Tried to google with ruby on rails mac os x time_zone error with no luck. Maybe I just can''t think of proper keyword to find it. RSL is a smart guy I agree, but I really feel I am not being respected somehow. Try to do a few hours googling and for some reason you cant find an answer, then somebody post you that passage when you are trying to pull your hair out. I maybe just blind on googling, but I think I did tried hard enough before I do ask a question. On Apr 9, 10:10 pm, "Ryan Bigg (Radar)" <radarliste...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:27 PM, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > > Guys I wonder if you ever come across a guy called RSL. > > Yes. > > > He keeps > > telling ppl the first rule of programming is Its All Your Fault, > > That''s because it is. > > > with > > the codinghorror page enclosed. > > And with good reason. > > > I am very alleged > > Correct word is "offended" > > > by him as he doesn''t > > present solution to people, > > He does. As long as if you can''t google it or it''s something incredibly > simple. > > > and indeed just try to insult people with > > this ITS ALL YOUR FAULT MAN. > > That''s because it is. > > Even the comment which I think I have put> reasonable effort to discuss about scaffold problem, I am being > > insulted on my blog. > > The comments on your blog are subject to your approval. Delete them. It > should be the button on the right. If you can''t find it, google it. > > > I feel disappointed about such member in rails, > > I don''t. rsl is a smart guy. He''s not helping you because what you''re asking > can be googled. > > > > > despite he did finally help on fixing a weird problem on my leopard > > rails (for some reason the gem source for rubyonrails is being > > added). > > > Sorry if I try to write something a bit personal here, but I just feel > > I should voice it out. > > No problem dude. > > Goodwill, I already posted the "Life Cycle of a Problem" as a comment to > your blog, but I''ll repost it here: > > 1. Encounter the problem. > 2. Google. > 3. Google better. > 4. Google harder, changing/removing keywords to get better results. Don''t > paste the whole damn error, just perhaps the class name such as > ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid. > 5. Ask somebody. Format your sentences properly using correct english (not > that you haven''t done this, just that some people''s english skills are not > all that great) > 6. Ask somebody else. > 7. Post about it somewhere in detailed format. Don''t say "omg it''s > broken!1!!!" Explain what "it" is, how it''s broken and what you were doing > before it was broken. > 8. Never get angry. Angry makes you unreasonable and makes you do silly > things, such as formatting a hard drive or destroying a suburb. > 9. Rejoice when it''s fixed. > > For those of you who don''t know, goodwill runs a blog:http://bugthis.blogspot.com/. He posts stuff on this blog, as all good > bloggers do. > > > > > > > On Apr 9, 12:02 am, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > > > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > > > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > > > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > > > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > > > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > > > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > > > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > > > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > > > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > > > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > > > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > > > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: > >http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > > > future version of rails. > > -- > Ryan Bigghttp://www.frozenplague.net > Feel free to add me to MSN and/or GTalk as this email.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Thanks Brian, I will have a look. I wonder if we could do some patch on the generator script (or install another generator if possible?) So that would look like the way I want. Maybe I should peek your code on scaffold_form_generator to find out how to do it. On Apr 9, 10:57 pm, "Brian Hogan" <bpho...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> The answer is simple - scaffolding in Rails 2.0 is what it is, and it''s not > going to change. The main reason it won''t is that very few people actually > use it. It''s not really designed for production, it makes BDD or TDD near > impossible, and it often generates more than you need. > > Some people like the form generation that you got with the old scaffolding. > I know I did, it was the only part of scaffolding I really liked because I > find form generation to be tedious when I am working with existing > databases. My solution was to develop a gem called scaffold_form_generator > > sudo gem install scaffold_form_generator > > Then given an existing model > > ruby script/generate scaffold_form User users > > Generates > app/views/users/_form.html.erb > app/views/users/new.html.erb > app/views/users/edit.html.erb > > This has been useful to a few people and solved their pain points. My point > here is that if you see something that Rails does that you disagree with, > you have the power to change how it works, or use something different. Rails > is opinionated and sometimes the opinions of the core team differ from mine. > 95% of the time, we agree, but when we don''t, I just build something > myself. > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:02 AM, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > > I come across this thread when I try to share my point of view about > > the new Rails 2.0 scaffold. > > > Again like most of us, we dont disagree with the RESTful approach, > > despite the fact I haven''t even totally understand that yet. > > > There are a few issues involved from this new scaffold. From the > > different thinking approach direction- I personally think about the > > data setup first before I generate the scaffold, so usually I would > > just do a model generation first, then scaffold. The approach really > > has nothing wrong IMHO. So demolish this original way to work and then > > use the new one obviously would cause quite a bit people disappointed. > > > Furthermore, indeed this new scaffold really have some issues one the > > URL handling. While the new active_resource approach creates great > > looking URL (especially when you look at the Akita On Rails tutorial > > on how the has_many thing works together on Post/Comments), but for > > example, to move the scaffold from root to a subfolder (i.e. > > namespace) would cost significant amount of work. > > > I have listed the work required in my blog, you may have a look: > >http://bugthis.blogspot.com/2008/04/rails-20-hurts-on-scaffold.html > > > I only hope there would have a more balanced solution patched in > > future version of rails.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Respect is earned not doled out like candy. People who come in public forums asserting that the language/framework/tool is broken don''t get respect. People who come in those forums stating "Hey, I''m doing foo and keep getting bar... What am I doing wrong" do. RSL On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:20 AM, goodwill <william.yeung.hk-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> RSL is a smart guy I agree, but I really feel I am not being respected > somehow. Try to do a few hours googling and for some reason you cant > find an answer, then somebody post you that passage when you are > trying to pull your hair out. I maybe just blind on googling, but I > think I did tried hard enough before I do ask a question.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
goodwill, In regards to your mac time_zone problem, I entered those EXACT THREE WORDS in the EXACT SAME ORDER into the EXACT SEARCH ENGINE and I immediately got this as a link: http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk/browse_thread/thread/816758f158368da1 Wouldn''t just so happen to be EXACTLY the same problem you were getting now, would it? -- Ryan Bigg Egotistical Maniac and Friendly Help Minion http://www.frozenplague.net --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Please read the entire thread- Thats the thread I am referring to which asked the question and no one has answered until I have asked again and on #rubyonrails, so RSL come out and answer the question. My post is the 2nd one. On Apr 9, 11:45 pm, "Ryan Bigg (Radar)" <radarliste...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> goodwill, > > In regards to your mac time_zone problem, I entered those EXACT THREE WORDS > in the EXACT SAME ORDER into the EXACT SEARCH ENGINE and I immediately got > this as a link:http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk/browse_thread/thread/... > > Wouldn''t just so happen to be EXACTLY the same problem you were getting now, > would it? > > -- > Ryan Bigg > Egotistical Maniac and Friendly Help Minionhttp://www.frozenplague.net--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
RSL ___ wrote:> Programming is science not sorcery.Rather, it is an art. The discovery of how to express a thought within the constraints of the medium chosen. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. I respect your skill again, but I am not aligned with you in this regard. People who shout this is wrong without clear elaboration should not be taken care- but I think I am trying to say there is something wrong in that generator- and oh I do like rails, just why this thing work so differently comparing to 1.x and why it seems not really improved? I think a well written discussion with respect to everyone (dont say you should fix it because thats how I expect it to work, for example) somehow should have value. I am just asking for viewpoints, so to see if its my blind eye havent see this problem in some aspect or there are people agreeing with what I talk about, and hopefully going to be patched by someone (or even myself?) Do I say its broken? I don''t think so, even if I do, I am just saying my beloved tool has some glitches (like most thing in the world..) and I hope there is a way to fix it. I really don''t understand why you just feel I am asking a question and not googling enough. On Apr 9, 11:27 pm, "Russell Norris" <r...-ftMzyaTR+bHNyFkoKTPOtdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Respect is earned not doled out like candy. People who come in public forums > asserting that the language/framework/tool is broken don''t get respect. > People who come in those forums stating "Hey, I''m doing foo and keep getting > bar... What am I doing wrong" do. > > RSL > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:20 AM, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > RSL is a smart guy I agree, but I really feel I am not being respected > > somehow. Try to do a few hours googling and for some reason you cant > > find an answer, then somebody post you that passage when you are > > trying to pull your hair out. I maybe just blind on googling, but I > > think I did tried hard enough before I do ask a question.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
goodwill wrote:> Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away > generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect.Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it up". What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do not get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us possess some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better than anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it really is. Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that decision. It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way of accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often subtle and hard to appreciate. Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is why the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on what you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. The pain will pass if you persevere. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
James, I appreciate a lot on your reply. I agree I probably have some ignorance in some sense (and thats why I need comments). I personally feel I really still want a working scaffold with proper REST support. The REST thing is cool, its just that to me I feel frustrated how it works now. Maybe its correct to say I should just get rid of scaffolding, but I do miss it. I am dirty and lazy sometime (esp when deadline is close) so I do use scaffold, and customers are just happy with that and I could spend more time to fix more important tasks. So when I found the generator problem in scaffold, that kinda burn me hard. I understand like most wizard feature, scaffold probably are just some code candy. But then it has been a helpful servant, so I still miss it. I won''t give up rails afterall as its way lot better than PHP to me (I always feel dizzy trying to find out where to start on a php project, but rails is so natural to just find the controller which does the task I am concern about). So what should I do? :( For now probably just bear with it and does all the painful patching after scaffold generation to move that properly to namespaces, long run... I really hope a better scaffold will come out. On Apr 10, 12:36 am, James Byrne <rails-mailing-l...-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> goodwill wrote: > > Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away > > generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. > > Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us > have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and > similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it > up". > > What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do not > get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more > ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us possess > some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better than > anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it > really is. > > Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking > those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to > scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that decision. > It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a > matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way > of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. > > The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, > particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way of > accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from > procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The > difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often > subtle and hard to appreciate. > > Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think > that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what > you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, > will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is why > the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on what > you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. > > The pain will pass if you persevere. > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Apr 9, 2008, at 9:51 AM, goodwill wrote:> I really hope a better scaffold > will come out.Have you considered ActiveScaffold (http://activescaffold.com/)? It''s very different from a generator because it does create things dynamically, but it supports REST and has a lot of keen Ajax features. Have a look. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
goodwill wrote:> > I understand like most wizard feature, scaffold probably are just some > code candy. But then it has been a helpful servant, so I still miss > it. I won''t give up rails afterall as its way lot better than PHP to > me (I always feel dizzy trying to find out where to start on a php > project, but rails is so natural to just find the controller which > does the task I am concern about). >The scaffold is still there, in a sense, it just will not respond dynamically to changes in the underlying table as in version 1.2. If you simply want a quick and dirty admin form to do direct DB maintenance then take a look at: http://api.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActionView/Helpers/ActiveRecordHelper.html#M001003 -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hmm... if thats just missing dynamic scaffold I won''t be posting this blog post/message at all :) I don''t mind its static- as most case I replace that to static at soonest because the field naming just doesnt look good, and in some cases it show up fields that suppose to be hidden from users'' eyes. The real pain about this new scaffold is that doesn''t really work as well as the original in terms of generating in namespaces, as well as the missing partial form file. I don''t mind to modify view file myself as long as there are no duplicate work. Now the modifications for adding a few ripple to new/edit form as well as the show form, which makes it kinda tedious to do so. Furthermore I tried script/generate scaffold admin/post title:string that would create a not working scaffold because the table is then being named as admin_post, but the model seems still try to do Select * from Posts when a find all search is being triggered. So basically its not working. Trying to generate it without the namespace again requires a lot of work to put it back to the correct namespace folder (all the _url and _path functions are broken) which means again its not working. The problem doesn''t look requires rocket science to fix so I would hope I could spare enough time to drill in a bit and hopefully fix it. I will have a look on your ARHelper link, thanks in advance. On Apr 10, 12:58 am, James Byrne <rails-mailing-l...-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> goodwill wrote: > > > I understand like most wizard feature, scaffold probably are just some > > code candy. But then it has been a helpful servant, so I still miss > > it. I won''t give up rails afterall as its way lot better than PHP to > > me (I always feel dizzy trying to find out where to start on a php > > project, but rails is so natural to just find the controller which > > does the task I am concern about). > > The scaffold is still there, in a sense, it just will not respond > dynamically to changes in the underlying table as in version 1.2. If > you simply want a quick and dirty admin form to do direct DB maintenance > then take a look at: > > http://api.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActionView/Helpers/ActiveRecordHel... > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
rsl. Yes, you are right. And when you''re not right (which is not often), you admit it. I do however urge you to shut the fuck up and be polite. It''s annoying to listen to your whining. You _are_ right, and it _is_ peoples own fault. But why do you have to yell about it? Is 90% of the people you encounter annoying you, because they think it''s someone else''s fault? Then gtfo of the community, you''re the minority. You''re pissing people off. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
leethal, my response in this matter has been just that. a _response_ to "goodwill"s assertions that i am disrespecting him by not putting up with his asserting things are broken which are not. i am not yelling. i am not getting emotionally attached here. [projection much?] i don''t find anywhere close to 90% of any segment of the Ruby community [even new users] annoying. don''t take out yr personal frustrations with me in a public forum. thank you. RSL --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Ross, I like code generator more because it could be modified later for more detail adoption. ActiveScaffold is a good stuff though, so thanks for your pointer. On Apr 10, 12:56 am, "s.ross" <cwdi...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Apr 9, 2008, at 9:51 AM, goodwill wrote: > > > I really hope a better scaffold > > will come out. > > Have you considered ActiveScaffold (http://activescaffold.com/)?It''s > very different from a generator because it does create things > dynamically, but it supports REST and has a lot of keen Ajax features. > Have a look.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
James, It turns out creating my own modified version of generator is not that hard: http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/UnderstandingGenerators I probably would do a few code hack this weekend to come up with mine :) Then let''s see if my solution is going to help some people out from their pain :) On Apr 10, 12:58 am, James Byrne <rails-mailing-l...-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:> goodwill wrote: > > > I understand like most wizard feature, scaffold probably are just some > > code candy. But then it has been a helpful servant, so I still miss > > it. I won''t give up rails afterall as its way lot better than PHP to > > me (I always feel dizzy trying to find out where to start on a php > > project, but rails is so natural to just find the controller which > > does the task I am concern about). > > The scaffold is still there, in a sense, it just will not respond > dynamically to changes in the underlying table as in version 1.2. If > you simply want a quick and dirty admin form to do direct DB maintenance > then take a look at: > > http://api.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActionView/Helpers/ActiveRecordHel... > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Not to mention the fact that he''s free to continue to use Rails 1.2. Julian. Learn Ruby on Rails! Check out the FREE VIDS (for a limited time) VIDEO #3 out NOW! http://sensei.zenunit.com/ On 10/04/2008, at 2:36 AM, James Byrne wrote:> > goodwill wrote: >> Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away >> generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. > > Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us > have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and > similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it > up". > > What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do > not > get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more > ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us > possess > some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better > than > anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it > really is. > > Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking > those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to > scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that > decision. > It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a > matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way > of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. > > The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, > particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way > of > accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from > procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The > difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often > subtle and hard to appreciate. > > Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think > that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what > you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, > will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is > why > the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on > what > you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. > > The pain will pass if you persevere. > > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
True, but the new RESTful feature is useful, thats why I am a bit greedy and hope I could have best of both worlds. On Apr 10, 3:04 pm, Julian Leviston <jul...-AfxEtdRqmE/tt0EhB6fy4g@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Not to mention the fact that he''s free to continue to use Rails 1.2. > > Julian. > > Learn Ruby on Rails! Check out the FREE VIDS (for a limited time) > VIDEO #3 out NOW!http://sensei.zenunit.com/ > > On 10/04/2008, at 2:36 AM, James Byrne wrote: > > > > > goodwill wrote: > >> Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away > >> generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. > > > Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us > > have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and > > similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it > > up". > > > What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do > > not > > get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more > > ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us > > possess > > some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better > > than > > anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it > > really is. > > > Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking > > those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to > > scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that > > decision. > > It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a > > matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way > > of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. > > > The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, > > particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way > > of > > accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from > > procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The > > difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often > > subtle and hard to appreciate. > > > Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think > > that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what > > you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, > > will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is > > why > > the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on > > what > > you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. > > > The pain will pass if you persevere. > > > -- > > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Want to let everyone know that I am almost done hacking the generator. However I hit into an issue which due to my short age with ruby I don''t understand how to implement properly- the route_resources command does not allow me to do namespace. I want to add 2 methods, one to add namespace, the other one to do route_resources within a specified namespace, how should I add it to the Rails generator create command? (I bet its something like extend/include an addon module? but somehow I am a bit confused on this one still) it would be great if someone could contribute this piece of code. Most important thing: you may get the code from google code: http://code.google.com/p/rails-sfold-resources/ Simply use SVN to checkout and put it in your .rails home to play around it. Or you may also create a new rails project and then throw it inside lib/generators. On Apr 15, 8:47 pm, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> True, but the new RESTful feature is useful, thats why I am a bit > greedy and hope I could have best of both worlds. > > On Apr 10, 3:04 pm, Julian Leviston <jul...-AfxEtdRqmE/tt0EhB6fy4g@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > Not to mention the fact that he''s free to continue to use Rails 1.2. > > > Julian. > > > Learn Ruby on Rails! Check out the FREE VIDS (for a limited time) > > VIDEO #3 out NOW!http://sensei.zenunit.com/ > > > On 10/04/2008, at 2:36 AM, James Byrne wrote: > > > > goodwill wrote: > > >> Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away > > >> generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. > > > > Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us > > > have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and > > > similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it > > > up". > > > > What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do > > > not > > > get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more > > > ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us > > > possess > > > some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better > > > than > > > anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it > > > really is. > > > > Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking > > > those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to > > > scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that > > > decision. > > > It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a > > > matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way > > > of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. > > > > The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, > > > particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way > > > of > > > accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from > > > procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The > > > difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often > > > subtle and hard to appreciate. > > > > Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think > > > that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what > > > you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, > > > will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is > > > why > > > the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on > > > what > > > you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. > > > > The pain will pass if you persevere. > > > > -- > > > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I am amazed by your sheer determination and equal amount of stupidity. I honestly don''t know what else to say. -- Ryan Bigg http://www.frozenplague.net Feel free to add me to MSN and/or GTalk as this email. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Guys I made an update- now it will also generate appropriate routes inside routes.rb (but the indentation need some tuning, which I will fix it later) Basically I tried to do 2-3 level namespaces nesting and they all work correctly now. Known issues: 1. Imperfect indentation in routes.rb- will be fixed very soon 2. Ugly code: the extended route_resources_in_namespace is really some quick hack thus it has quite a bit duplications 3. Destroy does not remove namespace route, you have to do it yourself 4. Multiple scaffold elements does not reuse namespace code block, thats really difficult to fix as it has to follow the entire hierarchy to make sure the namespace is suitable to be used. Anyway I think its minor issue as all you really need to fix are just inside routes.rb. Please let me know if you have any questions, and if you found it useful, please reply the post so I know you are using it :) On Apr 22, 11:36 pm, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Want to let everyone know that I am almost done hacking the generator. > However I hit into an issue which due to my short age with ruby I > don''t understand how to implement properly- the route_resources > command does not allow me to do namespace. I want to add 2 methods, > one to add namespace, the other one to do route_resources within a > specified namespace, how should I add it to the Rails generator create > command? (I bet its something like extend/include an addon module? but > somehow I am a bit confused on this one still) it would be great if > someone could contribute this piece of code. > > Most important thing: you may get the code from google code: > > http://code.google.com/p/rails-sfold-resources/ > > Simply use SVN to checkout and put it in your .rails home to play > around it. Or you may also create a new rails project and then throw > it inside lib/generators. > > On Apr 15, 8:47 pm, goodwill <william.yeung...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > True, but the new RESTful feature is useful, thats why I am a bit > > greedy and hope I could have best of both worlds. > > > On Apr 10, 3:04 pm, Julian Leviston <jul...-AfxEtdRqmE/tt0EhB6fy4g@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > Not to mention the fact that he''s free to continue to use Rails 1.2. > > > > Julian. > > > > Learn Ruby on Rails! Check out the FREE VIDS (for a limited time) > > > VIDEO #3 out NOW!http://sensei.zenunit.com/ > > > > On 10/04/2008, at 2:36 AM, James Byrne wrote: > > > > > goodwill wrote: > > > >> Ok maybe you feel I am complaining. I probably should just throw away > > > >> generate scaffold and write my own to fix it in your aspect. > > > > > Please understand that none of us are criticizing you and most of us > > > > have felt similar frustration at various times with Rails and Ruby and > > > > similar technologies. Nor are we saying that you should just "suck it > > > > up". > > > > > What you are being told is that your problem is ignorance. Now, do > > > > not > > > > get upset at this because each and every programmer alive is far more > > > > ignorant than they are knowledgeable. It is just that all of us > > > > possess > > > > some small patch of intellectual property that we comprehend better > > > > than > > > > anyone else and sometimes we imagine that patch is much larger than it > > > > really is. > > > > > Rails 2.0 broke with its past and went down the road of ReST, taking > > > > those of us who cared to follow along with it. The change to > > > > scaffolding from 1.2 to 2.0 is one of the consequences of that > > > > decision. > > > > It is not as simple as rewriting your own scaffold generator, it is a > > > > matter of coming to understand that there is an entirely different way > > > > of accomplishing what you wish to do than was previously the case. > > > > > The conceptual change that ReST presents can be hard to grasp, > > > > particularly when one is familiar with a fundamentally different way > > > > of > > > > accomplishing the same things. It is much the same as breaking from > > > > procedural languages and coming to understand object programming. The > > > > difference is profound but the all the evident distinctions are often > > > > subtle and hard to appreciate. > > > > > Instead of immediately writing your own generator to do what you think > > > > that you want, you are should reconsider how you would accomplish what > > > > you desire within the new constraints of Rails 2.0. This, in the end, > > > > will prove the more profitable and enlightening course. And that is > > > > why > > > > the advice you have been given is essentially to reflect deeply on > > > > what > > > > you are saying and how you might alter your approach to your problem. > > > > > The pain will pass if you persevere. > > > > > -- > > > > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---