Can someone explain what the difference between the ._url and ._path
named routes generate by rest is? http://cheat.errtheblog.com/b (actually down at the moment) mentions
the following (taken from peepcode.com, yay topfunky!)
“Each method also has a counterpart ending in _url that includes the
protocol,
domain, and port.”
which I dont quite get, I mean no matter wich ones I use (in dev mode)
produce the same links. could someone rephrase/explain that?
yeah but like i said, in the end (ie browser) a complete link is
displayed. so does it make a difference to use path instead of url,
since path does get its prefix (domain+port) by rails anyway? can it be
that it makes a difference while in production rather than dev mode?
protocol,
domain, and port."
which I dont quite get, I mean no matter wich ones I use (in dev mode)
produce the same links. could someone rephrase/explain that?
yeah but like i said, in the end (ie browser) a complete link is
displayed. so does it make a difference to use path instead of url,
since path does get its prefix (domain+port) by rails anyway? can it be
that it makes a difference while in production rather than dev mode?
I don’t think production/dev mode makes any difference. But there are
cases where you’ll need one and not the other. There may be other
examples, but it makes a difference when you’re passing a named route
to the current_page? method. You’d want to use _path in that case; _url
won’t work. (It’s because of the way current_page? compares using
url_for and the request uri.)
-TJ
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.