Search Results

Search found 9829 results on 394 pages for 'ruby koans'.

Page 99/394 | < Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >

  • Multiple robots.txt for subdomains in rails

    - by Christopher
    I have a site with multiple subdomains and I want the named subdomains robots.txt to be different from the www one. I tried to use .htaccess, but the FastCGI doesn't look at it. So, I was trying to set up routes, but it doesn't seem that you can't do a direct rewrite since every routes needs a controller: map.connect '/robots.txt', :controller => ?, :path => '/robots.www.txt', :conditions => { :subdomain => 'www' } map.connect '/robots.txt', :controller => ?, :path => '/robots.club.txt' What would be the best way to approach this problem? (I am using the request_routing plugin for subdomains)

    Read the article

  • validates_uniqueness_of...limiting scope - How do I restrict someone from creating a certain number

    - by bgadoci
    I have the following code: class Like < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :site validates_uniqueness_of :ip_address, :scope => [:site_id] end Which limits a person from "liking" a site more than one time based on a remote ip request. Essentially when someone "likes" a site, a record is created in the Likes table and I use a hidden field to request and pass their ip address to the :ip_address column in the like table. With the above code I am limiting the user to one "like" per their ip address. I would like to limit this to a certain number for instance 10. My initial thought was do something like this: validates_uniqueness_of :ip_address, :scope => [:site_id, :limit => 10] But that doesn't seem to work. Is there a simple syntax here that will allow me to do such a thing?

    Read the article

  • Why does Rake task enhancement differ between my local environment and when deploying to Heroku Cedar?

    - by John Bachir
    I have this in lib/tasks/foo.rake: Rake::Task["assets:precompile"].enhance do print ">>>>>>>> hello from precompile" end Rake::Task["assets:precompile:nondigest"].enhance do print ">>>>>>>> hello from precompile:nondigest" end When I run rake assets:precompile locally, both messages are printed. When I push to heroku, only the nondigest message is printed. However, according to the buildpack, the push is executing the exact same command as I am locally. Why does the enhancement to the base assets:precompile case not work on heroku but does work locally?

    Read the article

  • New Rails project -- Rails2 or Rails3?

    - by Earlz
    I have this new project I need to build. I want to have at least started on it by the end of this month. So which version should I use though? Should I just stick with the stable Rails2 or try to use Rails3 so I won't have to migrate later? Which one would you suggest for someone that is still learning Rails?

    Read the article

  • Rails 3: Validate combined values

    - by Cimm
    In Rails 2.x you can use validations to make sure you have a unique combined value like this: validates_uniqueness_of :husband, :scope => :wife In the corresponding migration it could look like this: add_index :family, [:husband, :wife], :unique => true This would make sure the husband/wife combination is unique in the database. Now, in Rails 3 the validation syntax changed and the scope attribute seems to be gone. It now looks like: validates :husband, :presence => true Any idea how I can achieve the combined validation in Rails 3? The Rails 2.x validations still work in Rails 3 so I can still use the first example but it looks so "old", are there better ways?

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to refactor this Rails controller?

    - by Robert DiNicolas
    I'd like some advice on how to best refactor this controller. The controller builds a page of zones and modules. Page has_many zones, zone has_many modules. So zones are just a cluster of modules wrapped in a container. The problem I'm having is that some modules may have some specific queries that I don't want executed on every page, so I've had to add conditions. The conditions just test if the module is on the page, if it is the query is executed. One of the problems with this is if I add a hundred special module queries, the controller has to iterate through each one. I think I would like to see these module condition moved out of the controller as well as all the additional custom actions. I can keep everything in this one controller, but I plan to have many apps using this controller so it could get messy. class PagesController < ApplicationController # GET /pages/1 # GET /pages/1.xml # Show is the main page rendering action, page routes are aliased in routes.rb def show #-+-+-+-+-Core Page Queries-+-+-+-+- @page = Page.find(params[:id]) @zones = @page.zones.find(:all, :order => 'zones.list_order ASC') @mods = @page.mods.find(:all) @columns = Page.columns # restful params to influence page rendering, see routes.rb @fragment = params[:fragment] # render single module @cluster = params[:cluster] # render single zone @head = params[:head] # render html, body and head #-+-+-+-+-Page Level Json Conversions-+-+-+-+- @metas = @page.metas ? ActiveSupport::JSON.decode(@page.metas) : nil @javascripts = @page.javascripts ? ActiveSupport::JSON.decode(@page.javascripts) : nil #-+-+-+-+-Module Specific Queries-+-+-+-+- # would like to refactor this process @mods.each do |mod| # Reps Module Custom Queries if mod.name == "reps" @reps = User.find(:all, :joins => :roles, :conditions => { :roles => { :name => 'rep' } }) end # Listing-poc Module Custom Queries if mod.name == "listing-poc" limit = params[:limit].to_i < 1 ? 10 : params[:limit] PropertyEntry.update_from_listing(mod.service_url) @properties = PropertyEntry.all(:limit => limit, :order => "city desc") end # Talents-index Module Custom Queries if mod.name == "talents-index" @talent = params[:type] @reps = User.find(:all, :joins => :talents, :conditions => { :talents => { :name => @talent } }) end end respond_to do |format| format.html # show.html.erb format.xml { render :xml => @page.to_xml( :include => { :zones => { :include => :mods } } ) } format.json { render :json => @page.to_json } format.css # show.css.erb, CSS dependency manager template end end # for property listing ajax request def update_properties limit = params[:limit].to_i < 1 ? 10 : params[:limit] offset = params[:offset] @properties = PropertyEntry.all(:limit => limit, :offset => offset, :order => "city desc") #render :nothing => true end end So imagine a site with a hundred modules and scores of additional controller actions. I think most would agree that it would be much cleaner if I could move that code out and refactor it to behave more like a configuration.

    Read the article

  • mongo_mapper custom data types for localization

    - by rick
    hi i have created a LocalizedString custom data type for storing / displaying translations using mongo_mapper. This works for one field but as soon as i introduce another field they get written over each and display only one value for both fields. The to_mongo and from_mongo seem to be not workings properly. Please can any one help with this ? her is the code : class LocalizedString attr_accessor :translations def self.from_mongo(value) puts self.inspect @translations ||= if value.is_a?(Hash) value elsif value.nil? {} else { I18n.locale.to_s => value } end @translations[I18n.locale.to_s] end def self.to_mongo(value) puts self.inspect if value.is_a?(Hash) @translations = value else @translations[I18n.locale.to_s] = value end @translations end end Thank alot Rick

    Read the article

  • double slash apache configuration

    - by VP
    Hi, i'm deploying a ror application and now i have to rewrite the url (in apache) to add a prefix www to the url add / to the end of the url So i took the following approach: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/[^\.]+[^/]$ RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://%{HTTP_HOST}/$1/ [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^foo\.com RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.foo.com/$1 [R=301,L] The problem is that it is appending two trailing slash to my url So for example a resource /question/ask are becoming: http://foo.com//question/ask I tried to add the following Rule before all my Rewrite rules to try to remove the double //: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^// RewriteRule ([^/]*)/+(.*) http://www.foo.com/$1/$2 [R=301,L] but it didnt work.. any idea to rip off all extras "//" added to the url?

    Read the article

  • Rails: creating a custom data type, to use with generator classes and a bunch of questions related t

    - by Shyam
    Hi, After being productive with Rails for some weeks, I learned some tricks and got some experience with the framework. About 10 days ago, I figured out it is possible to build a custom data type for migrations by adding some code in the Table definition. Also, after learning a bit about floating points (and how evil they are) vs integers, the money gem and other possible solutions, I decided I didn't WANT to use the money gem, but instead try to learn more about programming and finding a solution myself. Some suggestions said that I should be using integers, one for the whole numbers and one for the cents. When playing in script/console, I discovered how easy it is to work with calculations and arrays. But, I am talking to much (and the reason I am, is to give some sufficient background). Right now, while playing with the scaffold generator (yes, I use it, because I like they way I can quickly set up a prototype while I am still researching my objectives), I like to use a DRY method. In my opinion, I should build a custom "object", that can hold two variables (Fixnum), one for the whole, one for the cents. In my big dream, I would be able to do the following: script/generate scaffold Cake name:string description:text cost:mycustom Where mycustom should create two integer columns (one for wholes, one for cents). Right now I could do this by doing: script/generate scaffold Cake name:string description:text cost_w:integer cost_c:integer I had also had an idea that would be creating a "cost model", which would hold two columns of integers and create a cost_id column to my scaffold. But wouldn't that be an extra table that would cause some kind of performance penalty? And wouldn't that be defy the purpose of the Cake model in the first place, because the costs are an attribute of individual Cake entries? The reason why I would want to have such a functionality because I am thinking of having multiple "costs" inside my rails application. Thank you for your feedback, comments and answers! I hope my message got through as understandable, my apologies for incorrect grammar or weird sentences as English is not my native language.

    Read the article

  • Redirects in RoR: Which one to use out of redirect_to and head :moved_permanently?

    - by scrr
    Hello, we are making a website that takes a generated incoming link and forwards the user who is clicking on it to another website while saving a record of the action in our DB. I guess it's basically what ad-services like AdSense do. However, what is the best way to redirect the user? I think html-meta-tag-redirects are out of question. So what other options are there? head :moved_permanently, :location => "http://www.domain.com/" This one is a 301-redirect. The next one is a 302: redirect_to "http://www.domain.com" Are there any others? And which is best to use for our case? The links are highly-dynamic and change all the time. We want to make sure we don't violate any existing standards and of course we don't want search-engines to tag us as spammers (which we are not, btw). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Extracting a Rails application into a plugin or engine

    - by Globalkeith
    I have a Rails 2.3 application which I would like to extract into a plugin, or engine. The application has user authentication, and basic cms capabilities supported by ancestry plugin. I want to extract the logic for the application into a plugin/engine so that I can use this code for future projects, with a different "skin" or "theme" if required. I'm not entirely sure I actually understand the difference between plugin and engine concepts, so that would be a good first point. What is the best approach, are there any good starting points, links, explanations, examples that I should follow. Also, with the release of R3 to consider, is there anything that I should be aware of for that, with regards to plugins etc. I am going to start off by watching Ryan's http://railscasts.com/episodes/149-rails-engines but obviously thats over a year old now, so one of the challenges I'm faced with is finding the most up to date and relevant information on this subject. All tips and help gratefully received.

    Read the article

  • Rails way for querying join table in has_and_belongs_to_many

    - by Michelle
    I have a user model and a role model with a has_and_belongs_to_many reliationship. The join table is roles_users (two columns - the PK of the user and the role) and has no corresponding model. I want to have a method that returns all users with a given role. In SQL that'd be something like SELECT u.id FROM role.r, roles_users ru WHERE r.role_id = #{role.id} AND r.role_id = ru.role_id I see that Rails' activerecord has a find_by_sql method, but it's only expecting one results to be returned. What is the "Rails Way" to give me a list of users with a given role e.g. def self.find_users_with_role(role) users = [] users << # Some ActiveRecord magic or custom code here..? end

    Read the article

  • Rails - Ability to Enable/Disable Links on a View?

    - by AnApprentice
    Hello, I have a UserMailer View that has several link_to's like so: <%= link_to('XXXXXXXX Link Title', item_url(@item, :only_path => false), :style => 'color:#5196E3;text-decoration:underline;') %> The page has several different links. I'd like to know if there is a way to globally set in the view to enable or disable the links. If enabled, the above would run like normal, if not the block above would just show the text (XXXXXXXX Link Title) and not be linked? Any ideas other than wrapping every link_to inside a IF statement? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Rails 3 routing - what's best practice?

    - by Mattias
    Hi guys, I'm trying out Rails, and I've stumbled across an issue with my routing. I have a controller named "Account" (singular), which should handle various settings for the currently logged in user. class AccountController < ApplicationController def index end def settings end def email_settings end end How would I set-up the routes for this in a proper manner? At the moment I have: match 'account(/:action)', :to => 'account', :as => 'account' This however does not automagically produce methods like account_settings_path but only account_path Is there any better practice of doing this? Remember the Account controller doesn't represent a controller for an ActiveModel. If this is in fact the best practice, how would I generate links in my views for the actions? url_to :controller => :account, :action => :email_settings ? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.3: How to create this SQL into a named_scope

    - by randombits
    Having a bit of difficulty figuring out how to create a named_scope from this SQL query: select * from foo where id NOT IN (select foo_id from bar) AND foo.category = ? ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1; Category should be variable to change. What's the most efficient way the named_scope can be written for the problem above?

    Read the article

  • require_owner code to limit controller actions not recognizing current user as owner

    - by bgadoci
    I am trying to restrict access to certain actions using a before_filter which seems easy enough. Somehow the ApplicationController is not recognizing that the current_user is the owner of the user edit action. When I take the filter off the controller correctly routes the current_user to their edit view information. Here is the code. Link to call edit action from user controller (views/questions/index.html.erb): <%= link_to "Edit Profile", edit_user_path(:current) %> ApplicationController (I am only posting the code that I think is affecting this but can post the whole thing if needed). class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base def require_owner obj = instance_variable_get("@#{controller_name.singularize.camelize.underscore}") # LineItem becomes @line_item return true if current_user_is_owner?(obj) render_error_message("You must be the #{controller_name.singularize.camelize} owner to access this page", root_url) return false end end and the before_filter class UsersController < ApplicationController before_filter :require_owner, :only => [:edit, :update, :destroy] #... end I simply get the rendering of the error message from the ApplicationController#require_owner action.

    Read the article

  • Simple CanCan problem

    - by sscirrus
    I have just started with CanCan and here's a sample of the code: # Ability.rb def initialize(user) user ||= User.new can :read, Link end # view.html.erb <% if can? :read, @link %> ... <% end %> This is from the github repo for CanCan but this doesn't seem to work (it returns false and stops the ... code from running). When I change the view to <% if can? :read, Link %>, it works. But, this is different to the CanCan readme. Do you know where I'm going wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Should I define models that will be owned by many different models or use controller and views?

    - by jgervin
    I am struggling to figure out how to get a relationship between several models. I have sales_leads which I need to view by company and by event. So if someone looks up the leads by company they can see all leads across all events, but also see all leads by event. Not sure if this is ownership versus a where? Should it be something like Company.sales_leads where("event.event_id = ?", "2356") Or Models: sales_lead belongs_to event belongs_to company

    Read the article

  • Should I Use Anchor, Button Or Form Submit For "Follow" Feature In Rails

    - by James
    I am developing an application in Rails 3 using a nosql database. I am trying to add a "Follow" feature similar to twitter or github. In terms of markup, I have determined that there are three ways to do this. 1) Use a regular anchor. (Github Uses This Method) <a href="/users/follow?target=Joe">Follow</a> 2) Use a button. (Twitter Uses This Method) <button href="/friendships/create/">Follow</button> 3) Use a form with a submit button. (Has some advantages for me, but I haven't see anyone do it yet.) <form method="post" id="connection_new" class="connection_new" action="/users/follow"> <input type="hidden" value="60d7b563355243796dd8496e17d36329" name="target" id="target"> <input type="submit" value="Follow" name="commit" id="connection_submit"> </form> Since I want to store the user_id in the database and not the username, options 1 and 2 will force me to do a database query to get the actual user_id, whereas option 3 will allow me to store the user_id in a hidden form field so that I don't have to do any database lookups. I can just get the id from the params hash on form submission. I have successfully got each of these methods working, but I would like to know what is the best way to do this. Which way is more semantic, secure, better for spiders, etc...? Is there a reason both twitter and github don't use forms to do this? Any guidance would be appreciated. I am leaning towards using the form method since then I don't have to query the db to get the id of the user, but I am worried that there must be a reason the big guys are just using anchors or buttons for this. I am a newb so go easy on me if I am totally missing something. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • after_create :create a new line in DB

    - by Karl Entwistle
    Hey guys I was wondering if anyone could help me with an issue im having, basically id like to have Account.create after a PayPal notification is received, There is a simple cart model which corresponds to line_items within the cart so add_account_to_market would look like this in pseudo code def add_account_to_market if status == "Completed" find the line items(via cart_id) that correspond to the cart.id that just been paid create an account with user_id set to the current carts user id end end Ive never tried to do something like this in Rails and its not working, Ive been pulling my hair out all night trying to fix this, hopefully someone can help or point me in the right direction. Thanks :) class PaymentNotification < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :cart serialize :params after_create :mark_cart_as_purchased after_create :add_account_to_market private def mark_cart_as_purchased if status == "Completed" cart.update_attribute(:purchased_at, Time.now) cart.update_attribute(:paid, true) end end def add_account_to_market if status == "Completed" l = LineItem.find(:all, :conditions => "cart_id = '#{cart.id}'") for l.quantity Account.new(:user_id => cart.user_id) end end end end PS mark_cart_as_purchased method is working fine, its just the add_account_to_market im having issues with.

    Read the article

  • SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv3 read server certificate B: certificate verify failed

    - by Vikash
    I am using Authlogic-Connect for third party logins. After running appropriate migrations, Twitter/Google/yahoo logins seem to work fine but the facebook login throws exception: SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv3 read server certificate B: certificate verify failed The dev log shows OpenSSL::SSL::SSLError (SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv3 read server certificate B: certificate verify failed): app/controllers/users_controller.rb:37:in `update' Please suggest..

    Read the article

  • How to run only the latest/a given test using Rspec?

    - by marcgg
    Let's say I have a big spec file with 20 tests because I'm testing a large model and I had no other way of doing it : describe Blah it "should do X" do ... end it "should do Y" do ... end ... it "should do Z" do ... end end Running a single file is faster than running the whole test suite, but it's still pretty long. Is there a way to run the last one (ie the one at the end of the file, here "should do Z")? If this is not possible, is there a way to specify which test I want to run in my file ?

    Read the article

  • CSRF protecting and cross site form access

    - by fl00r
    Hi. I aw working on cross site authentication (some domains have got common authentication). So I want to send authentication data (login, password) to main domain from others. How should I use protect_from_forgery and how can I check if data received from valid domain? What I am thinking now is to turn off protect_from_forgery for session controller and check domain name of received data. But maybe I can configure CSRF protection for not only one domain?

    Read the article

  • Rails: render a partial from a plugin

    - by Sam
    I'm getting a missing template error after I try rendering a partial from a plugin. I have included the files with the following: %w{ models controllers helpers views }.each do |dir| path = File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), 'app', dir) $LOAD_PATH << path ActiveSupport::Dependencies.load_paths << path ActiveSupport::Dependencies.load_once_paths.delete(path) end The Models are getting loaded, but as for other things I'm not sure what's going on. The helpers are not getting loaded too because I just copied the contents of the partial from the plugin instead of the render :partial = and then it came up with a helper error. Question is how to be able to :render :partial = from the views folder in my plugin

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >