\
**Category:** Rails\
**Created:** [January 8, 2008, 10:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-happened-to-form-rhtml-partial-in-rails-2-0/125411 "2008-01-08T22:31:30Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1
**Author:**  [@resident\_moron](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/resident_moron)\
**Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 10:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-happened-to-form-rhtml-partial-in-rails-2-0/125411/1 "2008-01-08T22:31:30Z")
Just wondering if anyone could point me to a good explanation of why
the latest way of doing things does not include using something like
\_form.html.erb partials in RESTful rails 2.0?? Why did we move away
from partials, etc??
---
**Author:**  [@resident\_moron](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/resident_moron)\
**Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 11:48pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-happened-to-form-rhtml-partial-in-rails-2-0/125411/2 "2008-01-08T23:48:17Z")
If you gave us more information as to what your problem was, then maybe
we
can help. Ranting & Raving about it doesn’t help us.
Rails 2.0 is using partials the exact same way all previous versions
have
been.
On Jan 9, 2008 8:01 AM, rails.impaired [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone could point me to a good explanation of why
> the latest way of doing things does not include using something like
> \_form.html.erb partials in RESTful rails 2.0?? Why did we move away
> from partials, etc??
>
> >
–
Ryan B.
> **[frozenplague.net](http://www.frozenplague.net)**
>
> This domain may be for sale!
Feel free to add me to MSN and/or GTalk as this email.
---
**Author:**  [@resident\_moron](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/resident_moron)\
**Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 11:58am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-happened-to-form-rhtml-partial-in-rails-2-0/125411/3 "2008-01-09T11:58:06Z")
I guess what you mean is why is the \_form.html.erb not separated from
the new.html.erb and edit.html.erb views any more when you generate a
scaffold.
Partials are still there and very much in favour where appropriate. In
the context of the scaffold, I think they have moved away from using
them for 2 reasons:
1. The use of partials for the inner section of the form prevent us
using the block level variable (usually f) to indicate the model
association of the form\_for
(e.g.
form\_for(:post, posts\_url do |f|
f.text\_area(:title)
end
)
2. Often the edit form is different to the new form. This allows us to
be ready to make these changes when they occur
Other than those reasons i can’t think of any other good ones for
making the change, but especially (1) seems to be the most likely
reason.
Nothing to stop you doing it for your views, either pass the “f”
variable through in the :locals =\> {} hash of the partial, or use the
fields\_for method within the partial.
---
**Author:**  [@resident\_moron](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/resident_moron)\
**Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 12:11pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-happened-to-form-rhtml-partial-in-rails-2-0/125411/4 "2008-01-09T12:11:37Z")
On Jan 9, 2008, at 11:57 AM, Wildtangent wrote:
> Nothing to stop you doing it for your views, either pass the “f”
> variable through in the :locals =\> {} hash of the partial, or use the
> fields\_for method within the partial.
Another option is to move the entire form into the partial using the
new idiom form\_for(@model).
It was customary to leave it outside to be able to write different
actions by hand in the new/edit templates, but this new idiom DRYfies
that.
– fxn