similar to: Naming confusion

I have created a product, with two controllers and two models, one for categories and one for articles. In my models directory, I have article.rb and articles.rb and seem to have code that relies on both of these! I am unable to get any validation working because of this (whichever model I put the code in, it doesn''t load it) Should I just rip it all apart and start again? --

I''m a total rails newbie, but I''m learning fast. I have a question that I can''t seem to find an answer for: What is the best way of coding views that represent foreign key relationships? For example, while developing, I''ve created an "articles" table. I create some scaffolding code and modify it all to look nice. I then realise, I need an

Hello all. I am trying to create a self-referential has_many :through. I used the following site as a guide http://blog.hasmanythrough.com/articles/2006/04/21/self-referential-through but it still doesn''t appear to be working. I have two models. Person and Relationship. A person has many contacts (Which is another person) through relationships class Person < ActiveRecord::Base

So I''m one of those nasty people building a self-referential habtm-like Association using the funky new :through stuff. This is about users having friends, so here''s my user.rb: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :friendships, :foreign_key => ''user_id'' has_many :friends, :through => :friendships, :source => :friend end And here''s

Hi all - I am having some trouble figuring out how to model self-referential entities in Rails. I have a "group" model, which can have 0 or more "group" objects or 0 or more "user" objects. I tried creating a subgroup table that has a parent_group_id and a child_group_id as foreign keys but can''t figure out how to create the mapping in my ruby model

Hi Hal, > After investigating PR14133, I've discovered that jump threading can output self-referential instructions: > %inc.us = add nsw i32 %inc.us, 1 such instructions are valid in unreachable basic blocks. > At least in the test case for that bug report, the relevant code is later deleted (perhaps it is unreachable), and so this does not cause a problem. Unfortunately, when

Hal Finkel wrote: > Hello, > > After investigating PR14133, I've discovered that jump threading can output self-referential instructions: > %inc.us = add nsw i32 %inc.us, 1 > > At least in the test case for that bug report, the relevant code is later deleted (perhaps it is unreachable), and so this does not cause a problem. Unfortunately, when vectorization is enabled, this

Hello, After investigating PR14133, I've discovered that jump threading can output self-referential instructions: %inc.us = add nsw i32 %inc.us, 1 At least in the test case for that bug report, the relevant code is later deleted (perhaps it is unreachable), and so this does not cause a problem. Unfortunately, when vectorization is enabled, this instruction causes BBVectorize to hang. Should

Hello List, I created a self-referential many-to-many relationship (as described in the book Rails recipe #18), where I have a model that has many-to-many relationships with itself. In this case, it''s person who can become friends. The join table looks like this: mysql> select * from friends_people; +-----------+-----------+-----------+ | person_id | friend_id | confirmed |

Hey guys, I could use some advice on a special case of a function pointer as a formal argument. I would like the function pointer type to contain the actual signature of the function, i.e. not a pointer to var args function. This becomes an issue when I have a function which can take a pointer to itself as an argument... our terminology for this is "a recursive procedure". That is, of

On 11/18/19 10:45 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: >>>>>> Tomas Kalibera >>>>>> on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 09:36:14 +0100 writes: > > On 11/18/19 9:18 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: > >>>>>>> Henrik Bengtsson > >>>>>>> on Sun, 17 Nov 2019 14:31:07 -0800 writes: > >> > $ R --vanilla R

Hi, I''m looking to add tagging to an application, and I would like to allow self-referential tags, so that I can tag my tags. With the goal of generating a flexible tag hierarchy. After some googling it looks like acts_as_taggable is not the best piece of code, and I''m hoping to use the has_many_polymorphs plugin from http://github.com/fauna/has_many_polymorphs/tree/master.

I recently submitted a pull-request (https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/10939) to address a bug in PostgreSQLAdapter#disable_referential_integrity related to how the existing code behaves in a transaction when the PostgreSQL user account lacks superuser privileges on the PostgreSQL instance. While this permits the code to function without crashing, it doesn''t actually make

On 24 February 2015 at 02:05, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Will try to reply to the larger thread again soon, but a quick reply on a > bit of a tangent... > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: >> >> 2. Should unreachable code be allowed to contain nonsense (like >> instructions that depend on

Hi, I''m having a little trouble figuring out how to make a self- referential HABTM bi-directional. I have a Employee class. Each employee can have a couple of bosses, who are also employees. The employee class has the following HABTM: has_and_belongs_to_many :bosses, :class_name => "Employee", :join_table => "bosses_courses", :association_foreign_key =>

With the help of the Rails Recipes have got a self-referential HABTM relationship working, but I''m really struggling with getting a new entry from a form accepted. i should say here that the form is also submitting info for the join table too. So in my model I have: class Type < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :subtypes, :class_name => ''Type'',

Sans rails my normal approach to handling this would be to enforce it in the database and when a database operation failed I''d try to validate the model to produce an error message. It''s always served me pretty well. Rails expects you to validate before commiting but of course this does nothing to guarantee referential integrity. It''s perfectly possible for one

Hi, I have a self-referential has_many :through relationship setup to track relationships between users. Basically relationships are modeled as a join table with an extra column ''relation''. create table relationships ( user_id integer unsigned not null, friend_id integer unsigned not null, relation char(1) not null, ) --- relations --- f = friend r = request to

I have been trying to model a labeled graph using ActiveRecord (trunk version). Basically, I have a ''Node'' model which represents a node linking to other nodes. Links (aka edges) are labeled (i.e., have a ''label'' attribute and other behavior). Thus I decided to model edges as an ''Edge'' model and use a ''has_many :trough''

Hi, Is rails supposed to support referential integrity? That is rails either support to be able to ensure that when a new contact is created this can only happen if a valid suberb is associated with it, and which mechanisms of the below are supposed to do this? (a) using DB foreign key constraints information as a basis? (b) using the "has_one" line in the model file to enfore? If