Does anyone have a link to where they changed the routing behavior in
edge rails with in the last 3 weeks? Or can give a brief overview of the
changes?
Seems for example the below went from:
messages: GET /:user_id/messages/
{:action=>“index”, :controller=>“messages”}
To this:
user_messages: GET /:user_id/messages/
{:controller=>“messages”, :action=>“index”}
This happened between revision 6518 and revision 6654 in edge rails.
Route is defined as:
map.resources :users do |user|
user.resources :messages, :path_prefix => ‘:user_id’
end
Thanks
user_messages: GET /:user_id/messages/
{:controller=>“messages”, :action=>“index”}
This happened between revision 6518 and revision 6654 in edge rails.
Route is defined as:
map.resources :users do |user|
user.resources :messages, :path_prefix => ‘:user_id’
end
This is done to prevent namespace classes. If you wish to get the old
behavior, you can do :name_prefix => nil.
The preferred way to do what you’re doing is now:
map.resources :users, :has_many => :messages
map.resources :users, :has_many => :messages
Ahh, thanks, I see it here now:http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/6588
Can you still specify a :path_prefix with the new way (has_many)?
No. If you want to use options outside of the convention, you’ll still
need to work with a block. The block will remain in place for those
(presumably rare) instances.
Route is defined as:
map.resources :users do |user|
user.resources :messages, :path_prefix => ‘:user_id’
end
This is done to prevent namespace classes. If you wish to get the old
behavior, you can do :name_prefix => nil.
The preferred way to do what you’re doing is now:
map.resources :users, :has_many => :messages
Ahh, thanks, I see it here now:
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/changeset/6588
Can you still specify a :path_prefix with the new way (has_many)?
For example if I wanted the prefix to be :user_login?
I have not fixed all the routes yet to test this.
Thank you,
The preferred way to do what you’re doing is now:
map.resources :users, :has_many => :messages
I am digging on this syntax. More terse and make sense in the context
of Rails/ActiveRecord.
I did get tripped up a bit by the changing of the _url and _path
methods.
http://tuples.us/2007/05/02/changes-to-nested-resource-routes/
Jordan