Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just
wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3
beta gem.
config/routes.rb contains:
get ''login'' => ''session#new''
post ''login'' => ''session#create'',
:as => :login
GET /login works fine:
Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49
SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0
Processing by SessionController#new as HTML
Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml
(77.9ms)
Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200
However POST /login gives the following error:
Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58
SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0
ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"):
rake routes returns the expected urls:
login POST /login
{:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"}
GET /login
{:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"}
Thanks, Daniel
--
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.
So I did some more digging it''s not related to routing directly. The error only occurs when using form_for with a session model defined like this: class Session include ActiveModel::Validations attr_accessor :login, :password, :id end when changing from form_for to form_tag the routing error goes away. Not really sure yet why this... On Feb 20, 6:02 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > beta gem. > > config/routes.rb contains: > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > GET /login works fine: > > Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > (77.9ms) > Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > However POST /login gives the following error: > > Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > rake routes returns the expected urls: > > login POST /login > {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > GET /login > {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > Thanks, Daniel-- 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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > beta gem. > > config/routes.rb contains: > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > >Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For example, resources :posts do collection do get :search end end or resources :posts do get :search, :on => :collection end Note: both of the examples are equivalent. Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily implemented this as follows: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: http://localhost:3000/logout http://localhost:3000/login Good luck, -Conrad> GET /login works fine: > > Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > (77.9ms) > Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > However POST /login gives the following error: > > Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > rake routes returns the expected urls: > > login POST /login > {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > GET /login > {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > Thanks, Daniel > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conradwt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 >> beta gem. >> >> config/routes.rb contains: >> >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> >> > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For > example, > > resources :posts do > collection do > get :search > end > end > > or > > resources :posts do > get :search, :on => :collection > end > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > implemented this as follows: > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login >Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => :login> match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > http://localhost:3000/logout > http://localhost:3000/login > > Good luck, > > -Conrad > > >> GET /login works fine: >> >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml >> (77.9ms) >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 >> >> >> However POST /login gives the following error: >> >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): >> >> >> rake routes returns the expected urls: >> >> login POST /login >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} >> GET /login >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} >> >> >> Thanks, Daniel >> >> -- >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> >-- 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.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conradwt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 >> beta gem. >> >> config/routes.rb contains: >> >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> >> > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For > example, > > resources :posts do > collection do > get :search > end > end > > or > > resources :posts do > get :search, :on => :collection > end > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > implemented this as follows: > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout >Today isn''t my day. The logout line should be match ''logout'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout> > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > http://localhost:3000/logout > http://localhost:3000/login > > Good luck, > > -Conrad > > >> GET /login works fine: >> >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml >> (77.9ms) >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 >> >> >> However POST /login gives the following error: >> >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): >> >> >> rake routes returns the expected urls: >> >> login POST /login >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} >> GET /login >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} >> >> >> Thanks, Daniel >> >> -- >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> >-- 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.
not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file for this test. What I want is: GET /login should be resolved to session#new POST /login should be resolved to session#create possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ routing.rb file get ''login'' => ''session#new'' post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login or when using match match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add the :via => :method to the options and call match class Session < ActiveRecord::Base # include ActiveModel::Validations attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id end On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > >> beta gem. > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For > > example, > > > resources :posts do > > collection do > > get :search > > end > > end > > > or > > > resources :posts do > > get :search, :on => :collection > > end > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > > implemented this as follows: > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => :login > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > Good luck, > > > -Conrad > > >> GET /login works fine: > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > >> (77.9ms) > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > >> login POST /login > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > >> GET /login > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > >> -- > >> 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<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.-- 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.
ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in there, but should have been in this message. Changing the Session class to: class Session < ActiveRecord::Base end and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just a workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the everything work correctly with: form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so far... On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file for > this test. What I want is: > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > routing.rb file > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > or when using match > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > end > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > > >> beta gem. > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For > > > example, > > > > resources :posts do > > > collection do > > > get :search > > > end > > > end > > > > or > > > > resources :posts do > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > end > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => :login > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > Good luck, > > > > -Conrad > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > > >> (77.9ms) > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > >> login POST /login > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > >> GET /login > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > >> -- > > >> 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@googlegroups.com. > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > >> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > > >> . > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.-- 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.
Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put which correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined for PUT /login Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError Session.new.id => nil On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in there, > but should have been in this message. > > Changing the Session class to: > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > end > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just a > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the everything > work correctly with: > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so far... > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file for > > this test. What I want is: > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > > routing.rb file > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > or when using match > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > end > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > > > >> beta gem. > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. For > > > > example, > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > collection do > > > > get :search > > > > end > > > > end > > > > > or > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > > end > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => :login > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > -Conrad > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > > > >> (77.9ms) > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > >> login POST /login > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > > >> GET /login > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > >> -- > > > >> 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@googlegroups.com. > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > >> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > > > >> . > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.-- 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.
So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is
the following code in "apply_form_for_options!":
html_options if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) &&
object.new_record?
{ :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id =>
dom_id(object), :method => :post }
else
{ :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id =>
dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put }
end
which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will
automatically set the method to PUT
since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options
this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post }
in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior...
If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated...
On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler
<daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:> Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url =>
> login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put which
> correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined
> for PUT /login
> Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT
>
> Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError
> Session.new.id => nil
>
> On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler
<daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in there,
> > but should have been in this message.
>
> > Changing the Session class to:
>
> > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base
> > end
>
> > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just a
> > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the
everything
> > work correctly with:
>
> > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path)
>
> > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so
far...
>
> > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler
<daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what
I
> > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing
file for
> > > this test. What I want is:
>
> > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new
> > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create
>
> > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/
> > > routing.rb file
>
> > > get ''login'' =>
''session#new''
> > > post ''login'' =>
''session#create'', :as => :login
>
> > > or when using match
>
> > > match ''login'' =>
''session#new'', :via => :get
> > > match ''login'' =>
''session#create'', :via => :post
>
> > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add
> > > the :via => :method to the options and call match
>
> > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base
> > > # include ActiveModel::Validations
>
> > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id
>
> > > end
>
> > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor
<conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor
<conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler <
> > > > >
daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this
ActionController::RoutingError and just
> > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a
bug in the Rails 3
> > > > >> beta gem.
>
> > > > >> config/routes.rb contains:
>
> > > > >> get ''login'' =>
''session#new''
> > > > >> post ''login'' =>
''session#create'', :as => :login
>
> > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The
''get'' and ''post'' HTTP verbs
> > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a
resource block. For
> > > > > example,
>
> > > > > resources :posts do
> > > > > collection do
> > > > > get :search
> > > > > end
> > > > > end
>
> > > > > or
>
> > > > > resources :posts do
> > > > > get :search, :on => :collection
> > > > > end
>
> > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent.
>
> > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could
have easily
> > > > > implemented this as follows:
>
> > > > > match ''login'' =>
"user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login
>
> > > > Correction: match ''login'' =>
"user_sessions#new", :as => :login
>
> > > > > match ''login'' =>
"user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout
>
> > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following:
>
> > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout
> > > > >http://localhost:3000/login
>
> > > > > Good luck,
>
> > > > > -Conrad
>
> > > > >> GET /login works fine:
>
> > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at
2010-02-20 17:45:49
> > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0
> > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML
> > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within
layouts/application.html.haml
> > > > >> (77.9ms)
> > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord:
0.2ms) with 200
>
> > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error:
>
> > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at
2010-02-20 17:45:58
> > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0
>
> > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches
"/login"):
>
> > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls:
>
> > > > >> login POST /login
> > > > >> {:controller=>"session",
:action=>"create"}
> > > > >> GET /login
> > > > >> {:controller=>"session",
:action=>"new"}
>
> > > > >> Thanks, Daniel
>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> 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@googlegroups.com.
> > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > >>
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib
e@googlegroups.com>
> > > > >> .
> > > > >> For more options, visit this group at
> > > >
>>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
--
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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > html_options > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > else > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > end > >Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update action. -Conrad> which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will > automatically set the method to PUT > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post } > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url => > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put which > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined > > for PUT /login > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT > > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in there, > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > end > > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just a > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the everything > > > work correctly with: > > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so far... > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file > for > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > > > > routing.rb file > > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > or when using match > > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > > > end > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the > Rails 3 > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' > HTTP verbs > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource > block. For > > > > > > example, > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > collection do > > > > > > get :search > > > > > > end > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have > easily > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => > :login > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > layouts/application.html.haml > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > > > > >> login POST /login > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > > > > >> GET /login > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com> > > > > > >> . > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object doesn''t respond to :new_record? On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > html_options > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > else > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > end > > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update action. > > -Conrad > > > > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will > > automatically set the method to PUT > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post } > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url => > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put which > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined > > > for PUT /login > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT > > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in there, > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > > end > > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just a > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the everything > > > > work correctly with: > > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so far... > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file > > for > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > or when using match > > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > > > end > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the > > Rails 3 > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' > > HTTP verbs > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource > > block. For > > > > > > > example, > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > > collection do > > > > > > > get :search > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have > > easily > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => > > :login > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > > layouts/application.html.haml > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > > > > >> login POST /login > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > > > > > >> GET /login > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > > e@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > >> . > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > > -- > > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.-- 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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what I > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing file for > this test. What I want is: > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > routing.rb file > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > or when using match > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > >The above attr_accessor overwrites the login and password getters and setters provided by ActiveRecord. -Conrad> end > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and just > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the Rails 3 > > >> beta gem. > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and ''post'' HTTP > verbs > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a resource block. > For > > > example, > > > > > resources :posts do > > > collection do > > > get :search > > > end > > > end > > > > > or > > > > > resources :posts do > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > end > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have easily > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => :login > > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > -Conrad > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within layouts/application.html.haml > > >> (77.9ms) > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with 200 > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > >> login POST /login > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > >> GET /login > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > >> -- > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com> > > >> . > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it > is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > doesn''t respond to :new_record? > >Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t been saved) or not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails console. -Conrad> On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is > > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > > > html_options > > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? > > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > > else > > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > > end > > > > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update action. > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will > > > automatically set the method to PUT > > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options > > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post } > > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url => > > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put > which > > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined > > > > for PUT /login > > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT > > > > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in > there, > > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > > > end > > > > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here just > a > > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the > everything > > > > > work correctly with: > > > > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so far... > > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to what > I > > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing > file > > > for > > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > > > or when using match > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just add > > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and > just > > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the > > > Rails 3 > > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and > ''post'' > > > HTTP verbs > > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a > resource > > > block. For > > > > > > > > example, > > > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > > > collection do > > > > > > > > get :search > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have > > > easily > > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => > > > :login > > > > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > > > layouts/application.html.haml > > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) with > 200 > > > > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > > > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > > > > > > >> login POST /login > > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > > > > > > >> GET /login > > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > > > e@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > >> . > > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > > > > -- > > > 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<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com> > > > . > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conradwt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? >> >> > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t been > saved) or > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails > console. > > -Conrad > >irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: nil> irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? => true irb(main):028:0> post.save => true irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? => false -Conrad> On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": >> > >> > > html_options >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } >> > > else >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } >> > > end >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update action. >> > >> > -Conrad >> > >> > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will >> > > automatically set the method to PUT >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post } >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url >> => >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put >> which >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined >> > > > for PUT /login >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError >> > > > Session.new.id => nil >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in >> there, >> > > > > but should have been in this message. >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base >> > > > > end >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here >> just a >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the >> everything >> > > > > work correctly with: >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so >> far... >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to >> what I >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing >> file >> > > for >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ >> > > > > > routing.rb file >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> > >> > > > > > or when using match >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just >> add >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id >> > >> > > > > > end >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and >> just >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the >> > > Rails 3 >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and >> ''post'' >> > > HTTP verbs >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a >> resource >> > > block. For >> > > > > > > > example, >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do >> > > > > > > > collection do >> > > > > > > > get :search >> > > > > > > > end >> > > > > > > > end >> > >> > > > > > > > or >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection >> > > > > > > > end >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have >> > > easily >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login >> > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => >> > > :login >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout >> > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login >> > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, >> > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within >> > > layouts/application.html.haml >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) >> with 200 >> > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> > >> > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): >> > >> > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: >> > >> > > > > > > >> login POST /login >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} >> > > > > > > >> GET /login >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} >> > >> > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel >> > >> > > > > > > >> -- >> > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> > > e@googlegroups.com> >> > > > > > > >> . >> > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at >> > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> > >> > > -- >> > > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> e@googlegroups.com> >> > > . >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> -- >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> >-- 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.
Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created only contained an id attribute. The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is not going to be stored in the database. The original implementation of Session was: class Session include ActiveModel::Validations attr_accessor :login, :password, :id end On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t been > > saved) or > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails > > console. > > > -Conrad > > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: nil> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > => true > irb(main):028:0> post.save > => true > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > => false > > -Conrad > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => :put is > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > >> > > html_options > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > >> > > else > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > >> > > end > > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update action. > > >> > -Conrad > > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided options > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => :post } > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, :url > >> => > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put > >> which > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is defined > >> > > > for PUT /login > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to PUT > > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been in > >> there, > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > >> > > > > end > > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here > >> just a > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the > >> everything > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so > >> far... > > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to > >> what I > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the routing > >> file > >> > > for > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the action_dispatch/ > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > >> > > > > > or when using match > > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post just > >> add > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > >> > > > > > end > > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError and > >> just > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in the > >> > > Rails 3 > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and > >> ''post'' > >> > > HTTP verbs > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a > >> resource > >> > > block. For > >> > > > > > > > example, > > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > >> > > > > > > > collection do > >> > > > > > > > get :search > >> > > > > > > > end > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > > > > > > > or > > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could have > >> > > easily > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as => > >> > > :login > > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, > > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad > > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:49 > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) > >> with 200 > > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > >> > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 17:45:58 > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches "/login"): > > >> > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > >> > > > > > > >> login POST /login > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > >> > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > >> > > > > > > >> -- > >> > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > >> > > e@googlegroups.com> > >> > > > > > > >> . > >> > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > >> > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > >> > > -- > >> > > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > >> e@googlegroups.com> > >> > > . > >> > > For more options, visit this group at > >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > >> -- > >> 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<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.-- 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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily > made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And > the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created > only contained an id attribute. >Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an instance(s) of Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base.> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > not going to be stored in the database. > >Then you can simply do the following: *require ''active_model'' class Session include ActiveModel::Validations validates_presence_of :login validates_presence_of :password attr_accessor :login, :password def initialize( attributes = {}) @attributes = attributes end end puts "valid session" puts session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) puts session.valid? # => false puts session.password = "foobar" puts session.valid? # => true puts session.errors puts puts "invalid session" puts session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) puts session2.valid? # => false puts session2.password = "foobar" puts session2.valid? # => true puts session2* * * Good luck, -Conrad> The original implementation of Session was: > > class Session > include ActiveModel::Validations > attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > end > > > On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it > > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > > > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t > been > > > saved) or > > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails > > > console. > > > > > -Conrad > > > > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: > nil> > > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > > => true > > irb(main):028:0> post.save > > => true > > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > > => false > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => > :put is > > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > > >> > > html_options > > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && object.new_record? > > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > >> > > else > > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > >> > > end > > > > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update > action. > > > > >> > -Conrad > > > > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it will > > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided > options > > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => > :post } > > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, > :url > > >> => > > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to put > > >> which > > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is > defined > > >> > > > for PUT /login > > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to > PUT > > > > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been > in > > >> there, > > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > > > > end > > > > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal here > > >> just a > > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the > > >> everything > > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > > > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so > > >> far... > > > > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent to > > >> what I > > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > routing > > >> file > > >> > > for > > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > action_dispatch/ > > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > >> > > > > > or when using match > > > > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post > just > > >> add > > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > >> > > > > > end > > > > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this ActionController::RoutingError > and > > >> just > > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug in > the > > >> > > Rails 3 > > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and > > >> ''post'' > > >> > > HTTP verbs > > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a > > >> resource > > >> > > block. For > > >> > > > > > > > example, > > > > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > > > > > > > collection do > > >> > > > > > > > get :search > > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > > > > > > > or > > > > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could > have > > >> > > easily > > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => :login > > > > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", :as > => > > >> > > :login > > > > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => :logout > > > > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 > 17:45:49 > > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml > > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: 0.2ms) > > >> with 200 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 > 17:45:58 > > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches > "/login"): > > > > >> > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> login POST /login > > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} > > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login > > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel > > > > >> > > > > > > >> -- > > >> > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > > >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > > >> > > e@googlegroups.com> > > >> > > > > > > >> . > > >> > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > >> > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > > >> e@googlegroups.com> > > >> > > . > > >> > > For more options, visit this group at > > >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > > > >> -- > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib > e@googlegroups.com> > > >> . > > >> For more options, visit this group at > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <conradwt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And >> the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created >> only contained an id attribute. >> > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an > instance(s) of > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is >> not going to be stored in the database. >> >> > Then you can simply do the following: > > *require ''active_model'' > > class Session > include ActiveModel::Validations > > validates_presence_of :login > validates_presence_of :password > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > @attributes = attributes > end > > end > > puts "valid session" > puts > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > puts session.valid? # => false > puts session.password = "foobar" > puts session.valid? # => true > puts session.errors > > puts > > puts "invalid session" > puts > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > puts session2.valid? # => false > puts session2.password = "foobar" > puts session2.valid? # => true > puts session2* > > * > * > Good luck, > > -Conrad >Here''s a better version: require ''active_model'' class Session include ActiveModel::Validations validates_presence_of :login validates_presence_of :password attr_accessor :login, :password def initialize( attributes = {}) @attributes = attributes end end puts "valid session" puts session = Session.new puts session.login = ''foo'' puts session.password = ''bar'' puts session.valid? # => true puts session.errors puts puts "invalid session" puts session2 = Session.new puts session2.password = "bar" puts session2.valid? # => true puts session2.errors I wish that this helps. Good luck, -Conrad> > >> The original implementation of Session was: >> >> class Session >> include ActiveModel::Validations >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id >> end >> >> >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < >> > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object >> > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? >> > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t >> been >> > > saved) or >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails >> > > console. >> > >> > > -Conrad >> > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: >> nil> >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? >> > => true >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save >> > => true >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? >> > => false >> > >> > -Conrad >> > >> > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler >> > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: >> > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => >> :put is >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": >> > >> > >> > > html_options >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && >> object.new_record? >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } >> > >> > > else >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } >> > >> > > end >> > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update >> action. >> > >> > >> > -Conrad >> > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it >> will >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided >> options >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => >> :post } >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... >> > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... >> > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, >> :url >> > >> => >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to >> put >> > >> which >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is >> defined >> > >> > > > for PUT /login >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to >> PUT >> > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil >> > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org >> > >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been >> in >> > >> there, >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. >> > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: >> > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base >> > >> > > > > end >> > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal >> here >> > >> just a >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the >> > >> everything >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: >> > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) >> > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so >> > >> far... >> > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < >> daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent >> to >> > >> what I >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the >> routing >> > >> file >> > >> > > for >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: >> > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create >> > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the >> action_dispatch/ >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file >> > >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match >> > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post >> > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post >> just >> > >> add >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match >> > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations >> > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id >> > >> > >> > > > > > end >> > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < >> > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> >> > >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < >> > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this >> ActionController::RoutingError and >> > >> just >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug >> in the >> > >> > > Rails 3 >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' >> > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and >> > >> ''post'' >> > >> > > HTTP verbs >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a >> > >> resource >> > >> > > block. For >> > >> > > > > > > > example, >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search >> > >> > > > > > > > end >> > >> > > > > > > > end >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > or >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection >> > >> > > > > > > > end >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could >> have >> > >> > > easily >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => >> :login >> > >> > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", >> :as => >> > >> > > :login >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => >> :logout >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 >> 17:45:49 >> > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML >> > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within >> > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml >> > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) >> > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: >> 0.2ms) >> > >> with 200 >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login gives the following error: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started POST "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 >> 17:45:58 >> > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError (No route matches >> "/login"): >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> rake routes returns the expected urls: >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> login POST /login >> > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"create"} >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login >> > >> > > > > > > >> {:controller=>"session", :action=>"new"} >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Thanks, Daniel >> > >> > >> > > > > > > >> -- >> > >> > > > > > > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> > >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> > >> > > e@googlegroups.com> >> > >> > > > > > > >> . >> > >> > > > > > > >> For more options, visit this group at >> > >> > > > > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> > >> > >> > > -- >> > >> > > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> e@googlegroups.com><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> > >> e@googlegroups.com> >> > >> > > . >> > >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> > >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> > >> > >> -- >> > >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org><rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscrib >> e@googlegroups.com> >> > >> . >> > >> For more options, visit this group at >> > >>http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> -- >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> >-- 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.
What are you trying to prove here? I''m not using ActiveRecord and my Session class IS NOT inheriting from ActiveRecord::Base either Session.anchestors => [Session, ActiveModel::Validations, ActiveSupport::Callbacks, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, JSON::Ext::Generator::GeneratorMethods::Object, ActiveSupport::Dependencies::Loadable, Arel::Sql::ObjectExtensions, Arel::ObjectExtensions, Kernel, BasicObject] I know how to add validations to it etc. (not included in this post to keep the examples lean) the point I''m trying to make here is the dependency of form_for on the :new_record? method. On Feb 20, 10:04 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily > >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And > >> the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created > >> only contained an id attribute. > > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an > > instance(s) of > > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > >> not going to be stored in the database. > > > Then you can simply do the following: > > > *require ''active_model'' > > > class Session > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > validates_presence_of :login > > validates_presence_of :password > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > @attributes = attributes > > end > > > end > > > puts "valid session" > > puts > > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > > puts session.valid? # => false > > puts session.password = "foobar" > > puts session.valid? # => true > > puts session.errors > > > puts > > > puts "invalid session" > > puts > > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > > puts session2.valid? # => false > > puts session2.password = "foobar" > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > puts session2* > > > * > > * > > Good luck, > > > -Conrad > > Here''s a better version: > > require ''active_model'' > > class Session > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > validates_presence_of :login > validates_presence_of :password > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > @attributes = attributes > end > > end > > puts "valid session" > puts > > session = Session.new > puts session.login = ''foo'' > puts session.password = ''bar'' > puts session.valid? # => true > puts session.errors > > puts > > puts "invalid session" > puts > session2 = Session.new > puts session2.password = "bar" > puts session2.valid? # => true > puts session2.errors > > I wish that this helps. > > Good luck, > > -Conrad > > > > > > >> The original implementation of Session was: > > >> class Session > >> include ActiveModel::Validations > >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > >> end > > >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > >> > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it > >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > >> > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t > >> been > >> > > saved) or > >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails > >> > > console. > > >> > > -Conrad > > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: > >> nil> > >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > >> > => true > >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save > >> > => true > >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > >> > => false > > >> > -Conrad > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > >> > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => > >> :put is > >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > >> > >> > > html_options > >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && > >> object.new_record? > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > >> > >> > > else > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > >> > >> > > end > > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update > >> action. > > >> > >> > -Conrad > > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it > >> will > >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided > >> options > >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => > >> :post } > >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8@public.gmane.orgm> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, > >> :url > >> > >> => > >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to > >> put > >> > >> which > >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is > >> defined > >> > >> > > > for PUT /login > >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to > >> PUT > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...@gmail.com > > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been > >> in > >> > >> there, > >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > >> > >> > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal > >> here > >> > >> just a > >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the > >> > >> everything > >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so > >> > >> far... > > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > >> daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent > >> to > >> > >> what I > >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > >> routing > >> > >> file > >> > >> > > for > >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > >> action_dispatch/ > >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > >> > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post > >> just > >> > >> add > >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > >> > >> > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > >> > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > >> > >> > > wrote: > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > >> > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this > >> ActionController::RoutingError and > >> > >> just > >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug > >> in the > >> > >> > > Rails 3 > >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > >> > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and > >> > >> ''post'' > >> > >> > > HTTP verbs > >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a > >> > >> resource > >> > >> > > block. For > >> > >> > > > > > > > example, > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > > > or > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could > >> have > >> > >> > > easily > >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => > >> :login > > >> > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", > >> :as => > >> > >> > > :login > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => > >> :logout > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, > > >> > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 > >> 17:45:49 > >> > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > >> > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml > >> > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: > >> 0.2ms) > >> > >> with 200 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login > > ... > > read more »-- 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.
Maybe I should make clear that I changed the Session implementation back to its original state after finding what caused the PUT method being attached. Looks like you were still assuming my Session inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. It was just for testing purpose to see if it works correctly with an ActiveRecord model. On Feb 21, 12:14 am, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> What are you trying to prove here? > I''m not using ActiveRecord and my Session class IS NOT inheriting from > ActiveRecord::Base either > > Session.anchestors => [Session, ActiveModel::Validations, > ActiveSupport::Callbacks, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, > JSON::Ext::Generator::GeneratorMethods::Object, > ActiveSupport::Dependencies::Loadable, Arel::Sql::ObjectExtensions, > Arel::ObjectExtensions, Kernel, BasicObject] > > I know how to add validations to it etc. (not included in this post to > keep the examples lean) the point I''m trying to make here is the > dependency of form_for on the :new_record? method. > > On Feb 20, 10:04 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily > > >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And > > >> the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created > > >> only contained an id attribute. > > > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an > > > instance(s) of > > > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > > >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > > >> not going to be stored in the database. > > > > Then you can simply do the following: > > > > *require ''active_model'' > > > > class Session > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > > @attributes = attributes > > > end > > > > end > > > > puts "valid session" > > > puts > > > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session.valid? # => false > > > puts session.password = "foobar" > > > puts session.valid? # => true > > > puts session.errors > > > > puts > > > > puts "invalid session" > > > puts > > > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session2.valid? # => false > > > puts session2.password = "foobar" > > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > > puts session2* > > > > * > > > * > > > Good luck, > > > > -Conrad > > > Here''s a better version: > > > require ''active_model'' > > > class Session > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > validates_presence_of :login > > validates_presence_of :password > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > @attributes = attributes > > end > > > end > > > puts "valid session" > > puts > > > session = Session.new > > puts session.login = ''foo'' > > puts session.password = ''bar'' > > puts session.valid? # => true > > puts session.errors > > > puts > > > puts "invalid session" > > puts > > session2 = Session.new > > puts session2.password = "bar" > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > puts session2.errors > > > I wish that this helps. > > > Good luck, > > > -Conrad > > > >> The original implementation of Session was: > > > >> class Session > > >> include ActiveModel::Validations > > >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > > >> end > > > >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather if it > > >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > > >> > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. hasn''t > > >> been > > >> > > saved) or > > >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the Rails > > >> > > console. > > > >> > > -Conrad > > > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > > >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, updated_at: > > >> nil> > > >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => false > > > >> > -Conrad > > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > >> > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method => > > >> :put is > > >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > >> > >> > > html_options > > >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && > > >> object.new_record? > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > >> > >> > > else > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > >> > >> > > end > > > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an update > > >> action. > > > >> > >> > -Conrad > > > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it > > >> will > > >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > > >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided > > >> options > > >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => > > >> :post } > > >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be appreciated... > > > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...@gmail.com> > > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that for_for(Session.new, > > >> :url > > >> > >> => > > >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method to > > >> put > > >> > >> which > > >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is > > >> defined > > >> > >> > > > for PUT /login > > >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the method to > > >> PUT > > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...@gmail.com > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not been > > >> in > > >> > >> there, > > >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > end > > > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal > > >> here > > >> > >> just a > > >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes the > > >> > >> everything > > >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have so > > >> > >> far... > > > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > > >> daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not equivalent > > >> to > > >> > >> what I > > >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > > >> routing > > >> > >> file > > >> > >> > > for > > >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > > >> action_dispatch/ > > >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > > >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match > > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and post > > >> just > > >> > >> add > > >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > >> > >> > > > > > end > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > > >> > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > >> > > wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this > > >> ActionController::RoutingError and > > >> > >> just > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a bug > > >> in the > > >> > >> > > Rails 3 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' and > > >> > >> ''post'' > > >> > >> > > HTTP verbs > > >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of a > > >> > >> resource > > >> > >> > > block. For > > >> > >> > > > > > > > example, > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > or > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you could > > >> have > > >> > >> > > easily > > >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match > > ... > > read more »-- 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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:19 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> Maybe I should make clear that I changed the Session implementation > back to its original state after finding what caused the PUT method > being attached. Looks like you were still assuming my Session inherits > from ActiveRecord::Base. It was just for testing purpose to see if it > works correctly with an ActiveRecord model. > >If you attended the Exploring Rails 3 Online conference, it was clearly discussed that this feature (i.e. ActiveModel) is ready for 3rd party ORM builders. -Conrad> On Feb 21, 12:14 am, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > What are you trying to prove here? > > I''m not using ActiveRecord and my Session class IS NOT inheriting from > > ActiveRecord::Base either > > > > Session.anchestors => [Session, ActiveModel::Validations, > > ActiveSupport::Callbacks, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, > > JSON::Ext::Generator::GeneratorMethods::Object, > > ActiveSupport::Dependencies::Loadable, Arel::Sql::ObjectExtensions, > > Arel::ObjectExtensions, Kernel, BasicObject] > > > > I know how to add validations to it etc. (not included in this post to > > keep the examples lean) the point I''m trying to make here is the > > dependency of form_for on the :new_record? method. > > > > On Feb 20, 10:04 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just > temporarily > > > >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. > And > > > >> the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I > created > > > >> only contained an id attribute. > > > > > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create > an > > > > instance(s) of > > > > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > > > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > > > >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > > > >> not going to be stored in the database. > > > > > > Then you can simply do the following: > > > > > > *require ''active_model'' > > > > > > class Session > > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > > > @attributes = attributes > > > > end > > > > > > end > > > > > > puts "valid session" > > > > puts > > > > > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > > > > puts session.valid? # => false > > > > puts session.password = "foobar" > > > > puts session.valid? # => true > > > > puts session.errors > > > > > > puts > > > > > > puts "invalid session" > > > > puts > > > > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > > > > puts session2.valid? # => false > > > > puts session2.password = "foobar" > > > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > > > puts session2* > > > > > > * > > > > * > > > > Good luck, > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > > Here''s a better version: > > > > > require ''active_model'' > > > > > class Session > > > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > > @attributes = attributes > > > end > > > > > end > > > > > puts "valid session" > > > puts > > > > > session = Session.new > > > puts session.login = ''foo'' > > > puts session.password = ''bar'' > > > puts session.valid? # => true > > > puts session.errors > > > > > puts > > > > > puts "invalid session" > > > puts > > > session2 = Session.new > > > puts session2.password = "bar" > > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > > puts session2.errors > > > > > I wish that this helps. > > > > > Good luck, > > > > > -Conrad > > > > > >> The original implementation of Session was: > > > > > >> class Session > > > >> include ActiveModel::Validations > > > >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > > > >> end > > > > > >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor < > conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > >> > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather > if it > > > >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the > object > > > >> > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > > > > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. > hasn''t > > > >> been > > > >> > > saved) or > > > >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the > Rails > > > >> > > console. > > > > > >> > > -Conrad > > > > > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > > > >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, > updated_at: > > > >> nil> > > > >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > > > >> > => true > > > >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save > > > >> > => true > > > >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > > > >> > => false > > > > > >> > -Conrad > > > > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > > >> > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method > => > > > >> :put is > > > >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > > > >> > >> > > html_options > > > >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && > > > >> object.new_record? > > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > > >> > >> > > else > > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > > >> > >> > > end > > > > > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an > update > > > >> action. > > > > > >> > >> > -Conrad > > > > > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? > it > > > >> will > > > >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > > > >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the > provided > > > >> options > > > >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method > => > > > >> :post } > > > >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended > behavior... > > > > > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be > appreciated... > > > > > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that > for_for(Session.new, > > > >> :url > > > >> > >> => > > > >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method > to > > > >> put > > > >> > >> which > > > >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route > is > > > >> defined > > > >> > >> > > > for PUT /login > > > >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the > method to > > > >> PUT > > > > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org > > > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not > been > > > >> in > > > >> > >> there, > > > >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > >> > >> > > > > end > > > > > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the > goal > > > >> here > > > >> > >> just a > > > >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes > the > > > >> > >> everything > > > >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I > have so > > > >> > >> far... > > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > > > >> daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not > equivalent > > > >> to > > > >> > >> what I > > > >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > > > >> routing > > > >> > >> file > > > >> > >> > > for > > > >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > > >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > > > >> action_dispatch/ > > > >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > >> > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and > post > > > >> just > > > >> > >> add > > > >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > > >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > end > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor < > conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > > > >> > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > > >> > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler > < > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this > > > >> ActionController::RoutingError and > > > >> > >> just > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a > bug > > > >> in the > > > >> > >> > > Rails 3 > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => > :login > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The > ''get'' and > > > >> > >> ''post'' > > > >> > >> > > HTTP verbs > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block > of a > > > >> > >> resource > > > >> > >> > > block. For > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > example, > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > or > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you > could > > > >> have > > > >> > >> > > easily > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match > > > > ... > > > > read more » > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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 Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Daniel Guettler <daniel.guettler-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:> What are you trying to prove here? > I''m not using ActiveRecord and my Session class IS NOT inheriting from > ActiveRecord::Base either > >I''m trying to prove to you that ActiveModel works without ActiveRecord::Base. It works so much so I''m building ActiveRecord style interface to work with Maglev. Next, in your initial e-mail to the mailing list, you mentioned that there was a possible bug in Rails 3 routing. What does this have to do with the possible bug in routing? -Conrad> Session.anchestors => [Session, ActiveModel::Validations, > ActiveSupport::Callbacks, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, > JSON::Ext::Generator::GeneratorMethods::Object, > ActiveSupport::Dependencies::Loadable, Arel::Sql::ObjectExtensions, > Arel::ObjectExtensions, Kernel, BasicObject] > > I know how to add validations to it etc. (not included in this post to > keep the examples lean) the point I''m trying to make here is the > dependency of form_for on the :new_record? method. > >> > On Feb 20, 10:04 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> Ok but I''m not using an ActiveRecord instance here. I just temporarily > > >> made Session inherit from ActiveRecord::Base for testing purpose. And > > >> the attr_accessors didn''t override anything since the table I created > > >> only contained an id attribute. > > > > > Session class inherits from ActiveRecord::Base. Thus, if you create an > > > instance(s) of > > > Session, then each instance is a type of ActiveRecord::Base. > > > > >> The idea here was to just create a normal class (not inheriting from > > >> ActiveRecord) and to only use the validations module. The session is > > >> not going to be stored in the database. > > > > > Then you can simply do the following: > > > > > *require ''active_model'' > > > > > class Session > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > > @attributes = attributes > > > end > > > > > end > > > > > puts "valid session" > > > puts > > > > > session = Session.new( :login => "foo", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session.valid? # => false > > > puts session.password = "foobar" > > > puts session.valid? # => true > > > puts session.errors > > > > > puts > > > > > puts "invalid session" > > > puts > > > session2 = Session.new( :login => "", :password => "bar" ) > > > puts session2.valid? # => false > > > puts session2.password = "foobar" > > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > > puts session2* > > > > > * > > > * > > > Good luck, > > > > > -Conrad > > > > Here''s a better version: > > > > require ''active_model'' > > > > class Session > > > > include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > validates_presence_of :login > > validates_presence_of :password > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password > > > > def initialize( attributes = {}) > > @attributes = attributes > > end > > > > end > > > > puts "valid session" > > puts > > > > session = Session.new > > puts session.login = ''foo'' > > puts session.password = ''bar'' > > puts session.valid? # => true > > puts session.errors > > > > puts > > > > puts "invalid session" > > puts > > session2 = Session.new > > puts session2.password = "bar" > > puts session2.valid? # => true > > puts session2.errors > > > > I wish that this helps. > > > > Good luck, > > > > -Conrad > > > > > > > > > > > > >> The original implementation of Session was: > > > > >> class Session > > >> include ActiveModel::Validations > > >> attr_accessor :login, :password, :id > > >> end > > > > >> On Feb 20, 7:53 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> > >> Yes, this is correct and expected, the question to me is rather > if it > > >> > >> is expected behavior to assume an update operation if the object > > >> > >> doesn''t respond to :new_record? > > > > >> > > Yes, this is expected because AR instance is either new (i.e. > hasn''t > > >> been > > >> > > saved) or > > >> > > not new (i.e. has been saved). One can easily test this in the > Rails > > >> > > console. > > > > >> > > -Conrad > > > > >> > irb(main):026:0> post = Post.new > > >> > => #<Post id: nil, title: nil, body: nil, created_at: nil, > updated_at: > > >> nil> > > >> > irb(main):027:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):028:0> post.save > > >> > => true > > >> > irb(main):029:0> post.new_record? > > >> > => false > > > > >> > -Conrad > > > > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:34 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > >> > >> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Daniel Guettler > > >> > >> > <daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > So to solve this, the reason why this ends up using :method > => > > >> :put is > > >> > >> > > the following code in "apply_form_for_options!": > > > > >> > >> > > html_options > > >> > >> > > if object.respond_to?(:new_record?) && > > >> object.new_record? > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :new), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object), :method => :post } > > >> > >> > > else > > >> > >> > > { :class => dom_class(object, :edit), :id => > > >> > >> > > dom_id(object, :edit), :method => :put } > > >> > >> > > end > > > > >> > >> > Yes, this is basic Rails. PUT HTTP verb translates to an > update > > >> action. > > > > >> > >> > -Conrad > > > > >> > >> > > which means for every object not responding to new_record? it > > >> will > > >> > >> > > automatically set the method to PUT > > >> > >> > > since the options are reverse merged later with the provided > > >> options > > >> > >> > > this can be avoided by setting explicit :html => { :method => > > >> :post } > > >> > >> > > in form_for - not sure though if this is entended behavior... > > > > >> > >> > > If someone has some inside view comments would be > appreciated... > > > > >> > >> > > On Feb 20, 7:24 pm, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > > > Ok what is really happening here is that > for_for(Session.new, > > >> :url > > >> > >> => > > >> > >> > > > login_path) includes a hidden input field setting _method > to > > >> put > > >> > >> which > > >> > >> > > > correctly complains about a routing error since no route is > > >> defined > > >> > >> > > > for PUT /login > > >> > >> > > > Remaining question to me is why does form_for set the > method to > > >> PUT > > > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.new_record? => NoMethodError > > >> > >> > > > Session.new.id => nil > > > > >> > >> > > > On Feb 20, 7:17 pm, Daniel Guettler < > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org > > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > ah the last bit of the previous message should have not > been > > >> in > > >> > >> there, > > >> > >> > > > > but should have been in this message. > > > > >> > >> > > > > Changing the Session class to: > > > > >> > >> > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > and adding a table to the database (which is not the goal > > >> here > > >> > >> just a > > >> > >> > > > > workaround for figuring out what''s going on here) makes > the > > >> > >> everything > > >> > >> > > > > work correctly with: > > > > >> > >> > > > > form_for(Session.new, :url => login_path) > > > > >> > >> > > > > This clearly shouldn''t be related but this is what I have > so > > >> > >> far... > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Daniel Guettler < > > >> daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > not quite the routes you are providing are not > equivalent > > >> to > > >> > >> what I > > >> > >> > > > > > wanted to archive and they are the only routes in the > > >> routing > > >> > >> file > > >> > >> > > for > > >> > >> > > > > > this test. What I want is: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > GET /login should be resolved to session#new > > >> > >> > > > > > POST /login should be resolved to session#create > > > > >> > >> > > > > > possible ways of doing so are according to the > > >> action_dispatch/ > > >> > >> > > > > > routing.rb file > > > > >> > >> > > > > > get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > >> > > > > > post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > or when using match > > > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#new'', :via => :get > > >> > >> > > > > > match ''login'' => ''session#create'', :via => :post > > > > >> > >> > > > > > the above two examples are equivalent since get and > post > > >> just > > >> > >> add > > >> > >> > > > > > the :via => :method to the options and call match > > > > >> > >> > > > > > class Session < ActiveRecord::Base > > >> > >> > > > > > # include ActiveModel::Validations > > > > >> > >> > > > > > attr_accessor :login, :password #, :id > > > > >> > >> > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:02 pm, Conrad Taylor <conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Conrad Taylor < > > >> > >> conra...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> > > >> > >> > > wrote: > > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Guettler < > > >> > >> > > > > > > > daniel.guett...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hi, I just ran into this > > >> ActionController::RoutingError and > > >> > >> just > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> wanted to check if someone can confirm this as a > bug > > >> in the > > >> > >> > > Rails 3 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> beta gem. > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> config/routes.rb contains: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> get ''login'' => ''session#new'' > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> post ''login'' => ''session#create'', :as => > :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Daniel, can you post the complete route? The ''get'' > and > > >> > >> ''post'' > > >> > >> > > HTTP verbs > > >> > >> > > > > > > > should exist within a member or collection block of > a > > >> > >> resource > > >> > >> > > block. For > > >> > >> > > > > > > > example, > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > collection do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > or > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > resources :posts do > > >> > >> > > > > > > > get :search, :on => :collection > > >> > >> > > > > > > > end > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Note: both of the examples are equivalent. > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Next, your routes look ambiguous meaning that you > could > > >> have > > >> > >> > > easily > > >> > >> > > > > > > > implemented this as follows: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#lnew", :as => > > >> :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > Correction: match ''login'' => "user_sessions#new", > > >> :as => > > >> > >> > > :login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > match ''login'' => "user_sessions#destroy", :as => > > >> :logout > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Lastly, your URLs will look like the following: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/logout > > >> > >> > > > > > > >http://localhost:3000/login > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > -Conrad > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> GET /login works fine: > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Started GET "/login" for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-02-20 > > >> 17:45:49 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> SQL (0.3ms) SET SQL_AUTO_IS_NULL=0 > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Processing by SessionController#new as HTML > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Rendered session/new.html.haml within > > >> > >> > > layouts/application.html.haml > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> (77.9ms) > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Completed in 85ms (Views: 84.1ms | ActiveRecord: > > >> 0.2ms) > > >> > >> with 200 > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> However POST /login > > > > ... > > > > read more » > > -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org<rubyonrails-talk%2Bunsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
Hi sir,
I have create one rails application ,am creating user form and
using the session (logged on) and (logged out) , i dont know how its
used am newipe in rails pls help
regards,
john
--
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 2:52 AM, john paul <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Hi sir, > > I have create one rails application ,am creating user form and > using the session (logged on) and (logged out) , i dont know how its > used am newipe in rails pls help > > regards, > john > >John, I would recommend reading the following: http://ruby.railstutorial.org/chapters/sign-in-sign-out#top Good luck, -Conrad> -- > 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > >-- 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.
Thanks.. On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Conrad Taylor <conradwt-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 2:52 AM, john paul <lists-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > >> Hi sir, >> >> I have create one rails application ,am creating user form and >> using the session (logged on) and (logged out) , i dont know how its >> used am newipe in rails pls help >> >> regards, >> john >> >> > John, I would recommend reading the following: > > http://ruby.railstutorial.org/chapters/sign-in-sign-out#top > > Good luck, > > -Conrad > > > >> -- >> >> 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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. >> >> > -- > 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. >-- 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.