+1... the hardest part is coming up with the name of the model, but from
there it''s much nicer. :)
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Thorsten Müller
<thorsten-1oxKqHKwyltBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
> that''s one of the reasons, why many people (like me)
> nearly never use habtm directly, but make the effort
> to create the intermediate model by hand and use
> the :through option for the final definition.
>
> Maybe there is another trick to get this work, but
> the model variant is the common problem solver
> in this case. the extra work isn''t that much and you
> get a lot of functionality for it. For example you can
> add status flags or other additional data to the model
> and have more freedom handling creating & deleting
> the relationship records.
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---