similar to: redefining the method belongs_to in ActiveRecord::Base

When you define belongs_to in a model, you can either access association or association_id. I was wondering how Rails would handle things if you set each one to be different. I made two simple models: class Foo < ActiveRecord::Base; end class Bar < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :foo end Now here''s a script/console session. >> f = Foo.create => #<Foo:0x270ec10

Hello, I needed to add custom cache field for one of my application. I thought I will share the code showing how to do this. This code below creates and maintain a custom cache field, for keeping track of totals. Say, you have accounts, and for each account there are transactions (either deposit/withdrawal), and one will like to keep track of the total balance for an account. So, let there be a

when i require acts_as_paranoid I''m getting: undefined method `alias_method_chain'' for #<Class:ActiveRecord::Base> (NoMethodError) It happens in acts_as_paranoid''s init.rb. here''s the whole file. the alias_method_chain is near the bottom. please advise. class << ActiveRecord::Base def belongs_to_with_deleted(association_id, options = {})

hello, I''m using the trunk versions of both plugins. I''m running into this error when I run a migration to try and create the versioned table for the model ''Note'' stack level too deep /Users/Adam/dev/sweetspot/app/trunk/config/../vendor/plugins/ acts_as_paranoid/init.rb:5:in `belongs_to_without_deleted''

Hi all, I have the following inside of an AR class definition: relationships=ActiveRecord::Base.connection.select_all(my_relationships_sql) relationships.each do |relationship| has_many RelatedItems, :class_name => relationship[''RelatedClass''], :foreign_key => relationship[''ForeignKey''] end This kind of works, but how can I assign the name of the

I''ve discovered what I''m pretty confident is unexpected behavior in accepts_nested_attributes_for, and am developing a patch, but I''ve encountered a question about how the core team would prefer the implementation to look. Here''s the bug: when assigning to a belongs_to relationship (and I believe one-to-one, but I haven''t verified yet) if you mark the

Hi I am trying to create a plug-in to fix the error in the rails core produced by the multiple delete on a HABTM relationship. I have confirmed that my plug-in is being included into the base during runtime however the code does not seem to be overridding the base class. module ActiveRecord module Associations module ClassMethods def has_and_belongs_to_many(association_id, options =

I''m trying to create a document upload system, where most of the code is the super class Document and just the path to file on the system is controlled by the sub classes. When I attempt to use my code, I get the following when I try to save the document. can''t dump anonymous class Class Any ideas? ** Migration ** class CreateDocuments < ActiveRecord::Migration def

Hello, I''m redefining ActiveRecord::Errors.default_error_messages in order to translate ActiveRecord''s validation messages. I''m putting the redefinition in config/environment.rb. The trouble is that I''ve found that this approach works as long as I''m running in development mode under WEBrick, but not on my ISP under production mode. I guess the

Support Requests item #2614, was opened at 2005-10-12 10:23 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=412&aid=2614&group_id=85 Category: win32-service Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 3 Submitted By: Scott Harper (sharperct) Assigned to: Nobody (None) Summary: warning: redefining constant Struct::Win32ServiceStatus Initial

I''ve put together another plugin, this time it adds some convenience functions to the validates_numericality_of validation routine. Nothing in this plugin can''t be done with existing validation routines, it just moves them to a place I feel is more appropriate. http://www.railtie.net/articles/2006/01/27/defining-numericality PS: Sorry for hijacking threads with my

<resending as I don't think I was in the mailing list yet when I sent first time... apologies if you receive this twice> Hello, I'm facing some strange behavior, and I hope you can provide a clarification. Consider the following code: virDomainPtr dom = virDomainLookupByName(virt, domain_name); if (dom) { printf("domain already

hi, i am trying to undefine a domain by using dm.undefine(); and then trying to create one with same name is giving me error saying 'Domain not found: no domain with matching uuid 'aeae9d4e-17cb-b661-a612-88ac677c28c1' i have attached my test program which reproduces the issue. please let me know where i am going wrong? configuration: libvirt : 0.6.3 Java

Conrado Miranda wrote: > To implement something that is common in Lisp. Suppose I have a program > that is running and can't be stopped or the cost being stoped is > prohibitive. If I find a better way to run an algorithm, I'd like to > update the running program non-stopping. The way I do this in Pure is to always call global functions in an indirect fashion, using an

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Conrado Miranda <miranda.conrado at gmail.com> wrote: > Great! It just worked. I was a bit worried about using pointers to call > functions because it's a little too overwhelming in a big project, I think. > > Just for the record, if the function code isn't freed with > freeMachineCodeForFunction, I get a segmentation fault during >

Hi All, is there a caveat in redefining .Call in a package? (Apart from the performance hit of the extra function call.) I want to execute a check every time I call back to C, and this seems to be the easiest solution, instead of modifying all functions of the package. It also seems to be a good way to supply the PACKAGE argument, btw. I guess this is a good solution, but I might have

When I redefine a method like this class Klass alias_method :method_without_addition, :method def method_with_addition ... method_without_addition ... end alias_method :method, :method_with_addition end I get into trouble in the development environment. As these definitions are executed again for each request, the second time around method_without_addition is actually the

I am curious if anyone knows of R code where the "{" function is redefined in a useful way. Or "(" for that matter. Thanks Mick

Hi Jeffrey, > 2. It could compile C, and either replace B's machine code with a > jump to C, or replace all calls to B with calls to C. Aside from not > having the infrastructure to do this, it's not thread-safe: > http://llvm.org/PR5184. if all calls were via a handle (i.e. load the function pointer out of some memory location then jump to it), then you could compile C,

I''m having a problem redefining a method in one of my modules. Lets say I have this module in /lib: module Hello def say_hello "hello" end end And one of my ActiveRecord models mixes it in like: class Item < ActiveRecord::Base include Hello end This works fine, I can call @item.say_hello just fine. But when I try to redefine the method: class Item <