search for: associationproxies

I''m marshaling ActiveRecord objects, and I want them to be as small as possible. How can I unload everything that can be reloaded from the database? If they''re marshaled before any of the associations are referenced then the referenced objects aren''t dumped. But if the association has been loaded, how can I unload it? AssociationProxy.reset doesn''t seem to do

I came across an issue in my code and after a hard debug session I found something that smells. First the context of my issue. I have a AR object that has a polymorphic belongs_to currently tied to nothing, I want to dump it to YAML. record.to_yaml This raises the following exception: TypeError: wrong argument type nil (expected Data) from

I wanted to do: foo.wrap and wrap would go to a specialized wrap for some types of foo and a general Object#wrap for all the others. So I added wrap to Object class Object def wrap self end end This worked except for objects which are actually AssociationProxy objects pretending to be some other object. The reason is that AssociationProxy removes all but a few methods from itself.

Running into an interesting problem that at first glance appears to be a bug in the AR association code. However, it''s explicitly coded this way so I''m not so sure. I have some code like this: class Address < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :addressable, :polymorphic => true end class Person < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :addresses, :as => :addressable,

I have: class Post < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :comments do def published find( :all, :conditions => {:published => true} ) end end end When in my controller I do Post.find(:first).comments.published.paginate :page => params[:page] I get an error undefined method `paginate'' for []:Array Is will_paginate supposed to

Can anyone explain this oddity to me? Given two classes as follows: class Question < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :category end class Category < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :questions end I get the following: >> q = Question.find 6789 => #<Question:0x37e9e70 @attributes={"id"=>"6789",

Hi all I want to overwrite the push method (which is an alias of <<, the same as concat) of collections, and there I want to test if :uniq is set to true in the relationship. If so, the method should check if the passed object is already related to the parent, or not (only then it will be added). But I just can''t find the original code of this method, so I could overwrite

Hi James, Jim, and everyone else who''s listening. I''ve been investigating an interesting bug related to mocks and rails AssociationProxies. See http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=3149&aid=12547&group_id=797 for details. The crux is that if you do this (rspec mock syntax): obj.should_receive(:msg).with(mock_of_a_model) and the implementation does this: obj.msg(containing_model.association_proxy) the exp...

Today I just spent 3 hours (and before a demo!) trying to figure out why my polymorphic association fields were breaking. Turns out someone else put in a patch for this 6 months ago. I''m not sure if its the same solution I''d use... I''d rather find_or_create attempt to use AssociationProxy#build if its available and only Base#new if we''re not on a proxy.

Hello all, I''m currently having an issue with some specs, specifically scope issues (probably more of a scope issue than a spec issue at this point)... Here''s the error: ActiveRecord::AssociationTypeMismatch in ''A new User should know what role it has'' Role expected, got NilClass D:/ruby/projects/restful_authentication_test/config/../app/models/role.rb:5:in

I have a spec which is failing, but I just can''t say why. Maybe I''m missing something painfully obvious? Here is the pastie of the results & the spec: http://pastie.caboo.se/42626 The spec to look for is "should have an array of users" I''ve printed out ("puts''ed") to the terminal the fact that the values are *opposite* to what

Hi All, It seems that :finder_sql in a HABTM association only interprets a single quoted #{id} the first time through a query. I see examples of this being used in a few places (though with has_many) and I don''t really see how to use :finder_sql without a #{id}. Am I missing something or is this just broken? -- Paul Haddad (paul.haddad@gmail.com paul@pth.com)

I''m trying to understand these results in irb, which implies that there''s some kind of proxy at play: >> aaron = User.find_by_login ''aaron'' => #<User:0xb7109cdc @attributes={"salt"=>"7e3041ebc2fc05a40c60028e2c4901a81035d3cd", "updated_at"=>nil, "contact_info_id"=>nil,

I am working with extensions to has_many associations, and I want to create a finder method that is conditional on the attributes of the object whose association I''m working with. So, to use the example from the Agile Web Development: the authors show on pg 340 in the second edition how to pass an argument to a finder method. But I want to know if it''s possible to instead have

I''m working on a cost estimation tool, that allows each estimate created to override base assumptions of price, cost, etc. Everything was fine, until we said, "Let''s add a ''target net revenue'' property." So, the resource model got a "target" column. The override model got a "new_target" column. But, whenever I set

I''m using Rails-1.1.4 with Ruby-1.8.4 So let''s say I have 2 model classes: class Item has_and_belongs_to_many :things end class Thing has_and_belongs_to_many :items end i = Item.new i.things << Thing.new( :value => "Something").save i.things << Thing.new( :value => "Something Else" ).save i.save Fine, now I have two records in the