should we follow the convention? or use singular? -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Definitely ignore as many conventions as you can, and thereby make development as hard as possible on yourself. On Feb 11, 5:14 am, hkhkhk <henry....-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> should we follow the convention? or use singular?-- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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 Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jeff <cohen.jeff-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Definitely ignore as many conventions as you can, and thereby make > development as hard as possible on yourself. >Ah yes, Consternation over Convention! -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
Really makes sense. A table has a collection of objects, plural. On Feb 11, 10:43 am, Rick DeNatale <rick.denat...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jeff <cohen.j...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > Definitely ignore as many conventions as you can, and thereby make > > development as hard as possible on yourself. > > Ah yes, Consternation over Convention! > > -- > Rick DeNatale > > Blog:http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ > Twitter:http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale > WWR:http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale > LinkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale-- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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 ask because I''ve seen debate on it and am not sure if the community has reached a consensus. Objects named person corresponding to a table named people seems brokenS, but I''m happy to do whatever is most standard. Perhaps this issue is a dead horse? On Feb 11, 9:47 am, Jeff <cohen.j...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Definitely ignore as many conventions as you can, and thereby make > development as hard as possible on yourself. > > On Feb 11, 5:14 am, hkhkhk <henry....-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > should we follow the convention? or use singular?-- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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.
hkhkhk wrote:> I ask because I''ve seen debate on it and am not sure if the community > has reached a consensus.The Rails convention is to use plural table names.> Objects named person corresponding to a > table named people seems brokenS,Why? One object is one person. The table contains data for many objects -- that is to say, many people.> but I''m happy to do whatever is most > standard. Perhaps this issue is a dead horse?I''d say so. Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org -- 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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.