Search Results

Search found 13254 results on 531 pages for 'ruby cocoa'.

Page 405/531 | < Previous Page | 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412  | Next Page >

  • will_paginate link to nested resources

    - by neotracker
    Hi, I'm using the will paginate gem from http://github.com/mislav/will_paginate Routes: map.resources :post do |post| post.resources :comments end Post Controller: @post = Post.first @comments = @post.comments.paginate :page => params[:page], :per_page => 10 My problem lies in the view: <%= will_paginate @comments %> This generates links like /post/1?page=1 What I need is /post/1/comments?page=1 Is there a way to just tell will_paginate what url helper to use? (like post_comments_path) Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between a restful route method for getting an index vs. creating a new object

    - by Jason
    According to rake routes, there's the same path for getting an index of objects as there is for creating a new object: cars GET /cars(.:format) {:controller=>"plugs", :what=>"car", :action=>"index"} POST /cars(.:format) {:controller=>"plugs", :what=>"car", :action=>"create"} Obviously, the HTTP verb is what distinguishes between them. I want the "create" version of the cars_path method, not the "index" version. My question is what route method do you invoke to choose the one you want? I'm telling cucumber what path to generate with this: when /the car plug preview page for "(.+)"/ cars_path(:action => :create, :method => :post) ...but it always chooses the "index" action, not "create". I've tried lots of combinations for the hash argument following cars_path and nothing changes it from choosing "index" instead of "create". I'll get an error like this: cars_url failed to generate from {:controller=>"plugs", :method=>:post, :what=>"car", :action=>"create"}, expected: {:controller=>"plugs", :what=>"car", :action=>"index"}, diff: {:method=>:post, :action=>"index"} (ActionController::RoutingError) This seems like a very simple question but I've had no luck googling for it, so could use some advice. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Saving an active record, in what order are the associated objects saved?

    - by Bryan
    In rails, when saving an active_record object, its associated objects will be saved as well. But has_one and has_many association have different order in saving objects. I have three simplified models: class Team < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :players has_one :coach end class Player < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :team validates_presence_of :team_id end class Coach < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :team validates_presence_of :team_id end I expected that when team.save is called, team should be saved before its associated coach and players. I use the following code to test these models: t = Team.new team.coach = Coach.new team.save! team.save! returns true. But in another test: t = Team.new team.players << Player.new team.save! team.save! gives the following error: > ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid: > Validation failed: Players is invalid I figured out that team.save! saves objects in the following order: 1) players, 2) team, and 3) coach. This is why I got the error: When a player is saved, team doesn't yet have a id, so validates_presence_of :team_id fails in player. Can someone explain to me why objects are saved in this order? This seems not logical to me.

    Read the article

  • How do I write an RSpec test to unit-test this interesting metaprogramming code?

    - by Kyle Kaitan
    Here's some simple code that, for each argument specified, will add specific get/set methods named after that argument. If you write attr_option :foo, :bar, then you will see #foo/foo= and #bar/bar= instance methods on Config: module Configurator class Config def initialize() @options = {} end def self.attr_option(*args) args.each do |a| if not self.method_defined?(a) define_method "#{a}" do @options[:"#{a}"] ||= {} end define_method "#{a}=" do |v| @options[:"#{a}"] = v end else throw Exception.new("already have attr_option for #{a}") end end end end end So far, so good. I want to write some RSpec tests to verify this code is actually doing what it's supposed to. But there's a problem! If I invoke attr_option :foo in one of the test methods, that method is now forever defined in Config. So a subsequent test will fail when it shouldn't, because foo is already defined: it "should support a specified option" do c = Configurator::Config c.attr_option :foo # ... end it "should support multiple options" do c = Configurator::Config c.attr_option :foo, :bar, :baz # Error! :foo already defined # by a previous test. # ... end Is there a way I can give each test an anonymous "clone" of the Config class which is independent of the others?

    Read the article

  • Rails: Multiple "types" of one model through related models?

    - by neezer
    I have a User model in my app, which I would like to store basic user information, such as email address, first and last name, phone number, etc. I also have many different types of users in my system, including sales agents, clients, guests, etc. I would like to be able to use the same User model as a base for all the others, so that I don't have to include all the fields for all the related roles in one model, and can delegate as necessary (cutting down on duplicate database fields as well as providing easy mobility from changing one user of one type to another). So, what I'd like is this: User -- first name -- last name -- email --> is a "client", so ---- client field 1 ---- client field 2 ---- client field 3 User -- first name -- last name -- email --> is a "sales agent", so ---- sales agent field 1 ---- sales agent field 2 ---- sales agent field 3 and so on... In addition, when a new user signs up, I want that new user to automatically be assigned the role of "client" (I'm talking about database fields here, not authorization, though I hope to eventually include this logic in my user authorization as well). I have a multi-step signup wizard I'm trying to build with wizardly. The first step is easy, since I'm simply calling the fields included in the base User model (such as first_name and email), but the second step is trickier since it should be calling in fields from the associated model (like--per my example above--the model client with fields client_field_1 or client_field_2, as if those fields were part of User). Does that make sense? Let me know if that wasn't clear at all, and I'll try to explain it in a different way. Can anyone help me with this? How would I do this?

    Read the article

  • Internet Explorer not loading stylesheet.

    - by Antarr Byrd
    I have a page that uses css. I works fine in firefox but when I open in IE there appears to be no styling. <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>MySite</title> <%= stylesheet_link_tag :all %> <%= javascript_include_tag :defaults %> <%= csrf_meta_tag %> </head> <body> <p> <nav> <ul> <li> <a href="#">Login</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Blog</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Contact Us </a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Help</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Trends</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Your Privacy!</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">Terms of Use</a> </li> <li> <a href="#">mySite.com</a> </li> </ul> </nav> </p> <%= yield %> </body> <aside style ="float:right; font-size:x-small;background:#ffffff;"> <center> Local Areas </center> <% @states.each do |state| %> <ul> <a href= "/states"> <li> <%= state.name %> </li> </a> </ul> <% end %> </aside> <footer> </footer> </html>

    Read the article

  • Bootstrap Modal & rails remote

    - by Kevin Brown
    Using this bootstrap modal extension and animate.css for fun, how can I take a make an easy ajax modal using :remote => true to fill in the modal box? Also, how would I use the bootstrap modal default "submit/cancel" buttons to interact with a form that's loaded? I'm looking for a more dynamic solution instead of hard-html-ing every modal into the page or using a bunch of jquery ajax calls for each dialog. I've done a few quick searches, but they've turned up nil for this particular solution.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to group validation?

    - by lambdabutz
    I am using a lot of my own validation methods to compare the data from one association to the other. I've noticed that I'm constantly checking that my associations aren't nil before trying to call anything on them, but I am also validating their presence, and so I feel that my nil checks are redundant. Here's an example: class House < ActiveRecord::Base has_one :enterance, :class => Door has_one :exit, :class => Door validates_presence_of :enterance, :exit validate :not_a_fire_hazard def not_a_fire_hazard if enterance && exit && enterance.location != exit.location errors.add_to_base('If there is a fire you will most likely die') return false end end end I feel like I am repeating myself by checking the existence of enterance and exit within my own validation. Is there a more "The Rails Way" to do this?

    Read the article

  • Best wrapper for simultaneous API requests?

    - by bluebit
    I am looking for the easiest, simplest way to access web APIs that return either JSON or XML, with concurrent requests. For example, I would like to call the twitter search API and return 5 pages of results at the same time (5 requests). The results should ideally be integrated and returned in one array of hashes. I have about 15 APIs that I will be using, and already have code to access them individually (using simple a NET HTTP request) and parse them, but I need to make these requests concurrent in the easiest way possible. Additionally, any error handling for JSON/XML parsing is a bonus.

    Read the article

  • Running rspec against multiple targets

    - by kaerast
    I've written an rspec test using Watir against a web application and it's running fine. However, I now want to be able to run this test against the web application running on different domain names. My initial thought was that I'd be able to pass a value to spec at the command line to set a variable within my script, but I can't see any easy method of doing this. So my second thought was that I might need to add an array of domains into my script and have it test all of them - but I don't always want to test every domain, and the domains are constantly changing as we add and remove sites to be tested. What are my options for allowing the choice of targets I want?

    Read the article

  • Stubbing a before_filter with RSpec

    - by TheDelChop
    Guys, I'm having trouble understanding why I can't seem to stub this controller method :load_user, since all of my tests fail if I change the actual implementation of :load_user to not return and instance of @user. Can anybody see why my stub (controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user)) seems to fail to actually get called when RSpec makes a request to the controller? require 'spec_helper' describe TasksController do before(:each) do @user = Factory(:user) sign_in @user @task = Factory(:task) User.stub_chain(:where, :first).and_return(@user) controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user) end #GET Index describe "GET Index" do before(:each) do @tasks = 7.times{Factory(:task, :user = @user)} @user.stub!(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) end it "should should find all of the tasks owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) get :index, :user_id = @user.id end it "should assign all of the user's tasks to the view" do get :index, :user_id = @user.id assigns[:tasks].should be(@tasks) end end #GET New describe "GET New" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should return a new Task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) get :new, :user_id = @user.id end end #POST Create describe "POST Create" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should create a new task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task.to_s end it "saves the task" do @task.should_receive(:save) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task end context "when the task is saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub!(:save).and_return(true) end it "should set the flash[:notice] message to 'Task Added Successfully'"do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task flash[:notice].should == "Task Added Successfully!" end it "should redirect to the user's task page" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should redirect_to(user_tasks_path(@user.id)) end end context "when the task isn't saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub(:save).and_return(false) end it "should return to the 'Create New Task' page do" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should render_template('new') end end end it "should attempt to authenticate and load the user who owns the tasks" do context "when the tasks belong to the currently logged in user" do it "should set the user instance variable to the currently logged in user" do pending end end context "when the tasks belong to another user" do it "should set the flash[:notice] to 'Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks.'" do pending end it "should redirect to the home page" do pending end end end end class TasksController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_user def index @tasks = @user.tasks end def new @task = @user.tasks.new end def create @task = @user.tasks.new if @task.save flash[:notice] = "Task Added Successfully!" redirect_to user_tasks_path(@user.id) else render :action => 'new' end end private def load_user if current_user.id == params[:user_id].to_i @user = User.where(:id => params[:user_id]).first else flash[:notice] = "Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks." redirect_to root_path end end end Can anybody see why my stub doesnt' work? Like I said, my tests only pass if I make sure that load_user works, if not, all my tests fail which makes my think that RSpec isn't using the stub I created. Thanks, Joe

    Read the article

  • How do I let a user sign in from a different domain on Authlogic?

    - by Newy
    [This is slightly different than a previous question about having multiple domains share the same cookie. It seemed like there wasn't an easy way to do that.] I have a application at application.com. A customer has app.customer.com pointed at my site on Heroku, and I have everything set up so that it renders a specific version of app correctly. The issue is that I want a user at app.customer.com to be able to login. I believe authlogic is now setting the cookie on application.com, so while it verifies the credentials, no session on customer.com is ever created.

    Read the article

  • Rails ActiveRecord- has_many through and belongs_to a related model

    - by Nick
    I have 3 models sites, user_favorites and users. Relevant relationships: class Site < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :users, :through => :user_favorites class UserFavorite < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user, :counter_cache => true belongs_to :site end class User < ActiveRecord:Base has_many :user_favorites has_many :sites, :through => :user_favorites All of that works just fine. I'd like to add a new attribute to the Site model to indicate which user created it. I don't believe this constitutes a has_and_belongs_to_many scenario. A site has many users through user_favorites but I want it to belong to a single user reflecting the owner/creator. I'm wondering what the ORM best practice is for this. SQL wise I'd just use different joins depending on what I was trying to query with a created_by FK in Site. Sorry if I'm missing something basic here. Thanks

    Read the article

  • ruby1.9.1 can't find installed gems, yet ruby1.8 can...

    - by Zombies
    On ubuntu here. I installed both ruby1.8 and ruby1.9.1. I also ran these commands ruby1.8 setup.rb ruby1.9.1 setup.rb Both worked fine, I was also able to install gems for both. The gems in gem 1.9.1 and gem1.8 both show up correctly for gem list. The problems however begin with this: ruby1.9.1 some_script.rb. It cannot find any of the gems. I tried uncommenting some out figuring that parseconfig was the problem, yet it couldn't find any of the others, which are definetly in gem1.9.1 list. Any thoughts as to what is causing this/how to recover?

    Read the article

  • collection_check_boxes get value

    - by 24sharon
    this is my view code <%=collection_check_boxes(nil, :admin_ids, Admin.all, :id, :name )%> but when i try get the value in the controller i get always an empty value if the user doesnt check any item and the length is always more than zero when i write this code arr = params[:admin_ids] ||= [] puts arr.length ther arr.length is 1 even if the user doesnt select any of the items how can i get an array of selected items only with no empty values

    Read the article

  • getting numbers from lines of text

    - by Flethuseo
    Hi everyone, I want to parse a text file, where I get numbers that are between parenthesis like this: 1 2 3 (4 - 7) 8 9 1 3 8 (7 - 8) 2 1 1 2 (8 - 10) 3 2 should return an array for each: array1: 4 7 8 array2: 7 8 10 I am thinking of using split for each line, like line.split("("), but that doesn't quite doing the trick.. I was wondering if there is something more sophisticated for the job. Any help appreciated, Ted

    Read the article

  • http authentication fails in cucumber when adding @javascript tag

    - by JESii
    I have a feature in my Rials app that works just fine with the message "Responds to browser_basic_authorize" from the Background Given step. However, if I add a @javascript tag before the scenario, then my Background Given fails with "I don't know how to login". What's going wrong and how do I go about testing javascrpt interactions on my app? Background: Given I perform HTTP authentication as "<id>/<password>" When I go to the homepage Then I should see "Text-that-you-should-see-on-your-home-page" Scenario: Displaying injury causative factors Given I am on the new_incident_report page When I choose "incident_report_employee_following_procedures_true" Then I should see "Equipment failure?" Then I should not see "Lack of training" When /^I perform HTTP authentication as "([^\"]*)\/([^\"]*)"$/ do |username, password| puts "id/pswd: #{username}/#{password}" ### Following works ONLY if performed first before even going to a page!!! if page.driver.respond_to?(:basic_auth) puts 'Responds to basic_auth' page.driver.basic_auth(username, password) elsif page.driver.respond_to?(:basic_authorize) puts 'Responds to basic_authorize' page.driver.basic_authorize(username, password) elsif page.driver.respond_to?(:browser) && page.driver.browser.respond_to?(:basic_authorize) puts 'Responds to browser_basic_authorize' page.driver.browser.basic_authorize(username, password) else raise "I don't know how to log in!" end end Rails 3.0.9, current gems, other tests passing.

    Read the article

  • I want to use the fleximage gem and s3 for storage, but don't want dev/qa/test env's to use s3

    - by Kevin Bedell
    I have a rails app that I'm going to host on engineyard and want to store image files on s3. But I don't know if I want all developer machines to beusing s3 for storage of all our test and dev images. Maybe it's not an issue -- but it seems like a waste to have everyone storing all our images in s3. I've heard of some ppl who store images on s3 'hacking' dev environments to store images locally on the file system -- and then using s3 in prod only. What are other people doing?

    Read the article

  • How to create a session in PHP when there is a session on the same domain in Rails?

    - by Tony
    I have a Rails app on a subdomain - xyz.domain.com, and a PHP app on another subdomain - abc.domain.com When a user is logged into the Rails app, I would like to give them a session so that I can log certain events about that user in the PHP app but in the same database of the Rails app. I would essentially just expose an API that requires authentication. What is the best way to go about this? I am not storing the session in a database

    Read the article

  • How can I make the Rails 3 router localize URLs using localization files?

    - by edgerunner
    What I'd like to be able to do is: in config/routes.rb resources :posts in config/locale/en.yml en: resources: posts: "posts" new: "new" edit: "edit" in config/locale/tr.yml tr: resources: posts: "yazilar" new: "yeni" edit: "duzenle" and get I18n.locale = :en edit_post_path(3) #=> /posts/3/edit I18n.locale = :tr edit_post_path(3) #=> /yazilar/3/duzenle I'd also like Rails to match any of these routes anytime and pass the associated locale in the params hash such that when I navigate to /yazilar , the request should be routed to the posts#index action with the :tr locale in the params hash. Any simple or complex way of doing that?

    Read the article

  • is this a secure approach in ActiveRecords in Rails?

    - by Adnan
    Hello, I am using the following for my customers to unsubscribe from my mailing list; def index @user = User.find_by_salt(params[:subscribe_code]) if @user.nil? flash[:notice] = "the link is not valid...." render :action => 'index' else Notification.delete_all(:user_id => @user.id) flash[:notice] = "you have been unsubscribed....." redirect_to :controller => 'home' end end my link looks like; http://site.com/unsubscribe/32hj5h2j33j3h333 so the above compares the random string to a field in my user table and accordingly deletes data from the notification table. My question; is this approach secure? is there a better/more efficient way for doing this? All suggestions are welcome.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412  | Next Page >