Search Results

Search found 12686 results on 508 pages for 'ruby on rails3 beta'.

Page 296/508 | < Previous Page | 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303  | Next Page >

  • CanCan polymorphic resource access problem

    - by Call 'naive' True
    Hi everybody, i don't quite understand how to restrict access to links in this particular case with CanCan. I always get "Edit" link displayed. So i believe the problem is in my incorrect definition of cancan methods(load_ and authorize_). I have CommentsController like that: class CommentsController < ApplicationController before_filter :authenticate_user! load_resource :instance_name => :commentable authorize_resource :article def index @commentable = find_commentable #loading our generic object end ...... private def find_commentable params.each { |name, value| if name =~ /(.+)_id$/ return $1.classify.constantize.includes(:comments => :karma).find(value) end } end end and i have in comments/index.html.erb following code that render file from other controller: <%= render :file => "#{get_commentable_partial_name(@commentable)}/show.html.erb", :collection => @commentable %> you can think about "#{get_commentable_partial_name(@commentable)}" like just "articles" in this case. Content of "articles/show.html.erb": <% if can? :update, @commentable %> <%= link_to 'Edit', edit_article_path(@commentable) %> | <% end %> my ability.rb: class Ability include CanCan::Ability def initialize(user) user ||= User.new # guest user if user.role? :admin can :manage, :all elsif user.role? :author can :read, [Article, Comment, Profile] can :update, Article, :user_id => user.id end end end relations with models is: class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :commentable, :polymorphic => true, :dependent => :destroy ... end class Article < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :comments, :as => :commentable, :dependent => :destroy ... end i have tried debug this issue like that user = User.first article = Article.first ability = Ability.new(user) ability.can?(:update, article) and i always get "= true" in ability check Note: user.role == author and article.user_id != user.id if you need more information please write thank's for your time && sorry for my english

    Read the article

  • What to Learn: Rails 1.2.4 -> Rails 3

    - by Saterus
    I've recently convinced my management that our outdated version of Rails is slowing us down enough to warrant an upgrade. The approach we're taking is to start a fresh project with current technology rather than a painful upgrade. Our requirements for the project have changed and this will be much easier. The biggest problem is actually that my knowledge of Rails is out of date. I've dealt only with Rails 1.2.4 while the rest of the world has moved on long ago. What topics have I missed by being buried in my work instead of keeping up with the current Rails fashion? I'm hesitant to dig through blogs at random because I'm not sure how much has changed between the intervening versions of Rails. It's no use to learn Rails 2.1-2.3 specific stuff that is no longer useful for Rails 3.

    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

  • Conditionally hide a portion of a partial when viewed from another controller

    - by user284194
    I'm using a partial from my messages controller in my tags controller. The portion in question looks like this: <% unless message.tag_list.nil? || message.tag_list.empty? %> <% message.tags.each do |t| %> <div class="tag"><%= link_to t.name.titleize, tag_path(t) %></div> <% end %> <% end %> Is there a way to hide this portion of the partial only when it is viewed from the tags controller? Thanks for reading my question.

    Read the article

  • Rails routes matching query parameters

    - by Harry Wood
    Rails routes are great for matching RESTful style '/' separated bits of a URL, but can I match query parameters in a map.connect config. I want different controllers/actions to be invoked depending on the presence of a parameter after the '?'. I was trying something like this... map.connect "api/my/path?apple=:applecode", :controller = 'apples_controller', :action = 'my_action' map.connect "api/my/path?banana=:bananacode", :controller = 'bananas_controller', :action = 'my_action' For routing purposes I don't care about the value of the parameter, as long as it is available to the controller in the 'params' hash

    Read the article

  • Checking ActiveRecord Associations in RSpec.

    - by alokswain
    I am learning how to write test cases using Rspec. I have a simple Post Comments Scaffold where a Post can have many Comments. I am testing this using Rspec. How should i go about checking for Post :has_many :comments. Should I stub Post.comments method and then check this with by returning a mock object of array of comment objects? Is testing for AR associations really required ?

    Read the article

  • Only show non blank attributes for a model in views in Rails

    - by Senthil
    Say I've a user model and there are bunch of user info, like email, birthdate, location, telephone number etc. What's the simplest way of hiding the attributes that are blank? I've doing something like <% if blog.title.empty? -%> <p>Body: <%=h blog.body %></p> <p>Comments: <%=h blog.comments %></p> <% elsif blog.body.empty? %> <p>Title: <%=h blog.title %></p> <p>Comments: <%=h blog.comments %></p> <% else -%> <p>Title: <%=h blog.title %></p> <p>Body: <%=h blog.body %></p> <% end -%> Clearly that is one ugly child. Other than using partials to render, is there a trick to only show non blank fields? I've been trying to write a helpher method to make the view cleaner, but that's even more ugly. Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Rails ActionCaching with Memcached fragment hit but action gets called anyway

    - by baldtrol
    Hi stackoverflow. I'm running into something strange. I'm using memcached with a caches_action setup. I'm doing this in 4 different controllers. In two of them, it works flawlessly (so far), though admittedly those two controllers are less complicated than the two in which it doesn't seem to work. I'm doing something like this: caches_action :index, :expires_in => 6.hours, :cache_path => Proc.new {|controller| controller.send(:generate_cache_path) }, :layout => false, :if => Proc.new { |c| c.request.format.js? } The intention behind the above is to cache some results that are dependent on the params. my :generate_cache_path method just takes into account some params and session vars and creates a unique key for memcached. I can see in memcached -vv that this is working. What's weird is that I get my request from the rails app for a given key, and I see memcached (with -vv) get the request and send back the response. But then my action runs anyway, and a new value is then set for the same key, even when all the same params are given. I can watch it happen. In the controllers where everything is working, the request is made for the fragment, it gets it, and the action in the controller is halted, and the fragment is passed back. These lines come from the exact same request: Cached fragment hit: views/items/?page=1&rp=10&srtn=created_at&srto=DESC.js And then: Cached fragment miss: views/items/?page=1&rp=10&srtn=created_at&srto=DESC.js I don't know what to make of it, or if I'm doing something stupid. Any help or ideas where I could start looking for trouble would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Default js included in Rails

    - by hizki
    When creating a new Rails application, it is automatically supplied with several quite large js files. In the application layout, by default, all of them are loaded into the page: <%= javascript_include_tag :defaults %> I was wondering, isn't loading all those javascripts can make the site possibly mush slower? And if so, where can I change the definition of :defaults? Or should I just include the ones I need and remove the code line mentioned above? Thank you

    Read the article

  • rails code within javascript

    - by Jesse
    I am trying to use some rails code withing a javascript and need to have that rails code be dynamically changed. Here's the line of code: $(this).replaceWith("<%= escape_javascript(render(:partial => 'shared/products')) %>"); The 'shared/products' is the part I want to change based off information passed earlier in the javascript. How do I insert a value from javascript so that instead of 'shared/products' the products portion can be a variable? Hope this makes sense. I'm not the most experienced jQuery/javascript programmer, so any help is very much appreciated. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Thinking sphinx, has_one association

    - by homakov
    Hi, anybody, please, help me with Thinking_sphinx configuration. I have table profile1, which has_one profile2 and profile3. So i just need to index them both, but i can't. I tried indexes name indexes profile2(:name), :as = :profile2_name indexes profile3(:name), :as = :profile3_name has id What i m doing wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Need help in SQL and Sequel involving inner join and where/filter

    - by mhd
    Need help transfer sql to sequel: SQL: SELECT table_t.curr_id FROM table_t INNER JOIN table_c ON table_c.curr_id = table_t.curr_id INNER JOIN table_b ON table_b.bic = table_t.bic WHERE table_c.alpha_id = 'XXX' AND table_b.name='Foo'; I'm stuck in the sequel, I don't know how to filter, so far like this: cid= table_t.select(:curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id). join(:table_b, :bic=>:bic). filter( ????? ) Answer with better idiom than above is appreciated as well.Tnx. UPDATE: I have to modify a little to make it works cid = DB[:table_t].select(:table_t__curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id). join(:table_b, :bic=>:table_t__bic). #add table_t or else ERROR: column table_c.bic does not exist filter(:table_c__alpha_id => 'XXX', :table_b__name => 'Foo') without filter, cid = DB[:table_t].select(:table_t__curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id, :alpha_id=>'XXX'). join(:table_b, :bic=>:table_t__bic, :name=>'Foo') btw I use pgsql 9.0

    Read the article

  • active record relations – who needs it?

    - by M2_
    Well, I`m confused about rails queries. For example: Affiche belongs_to :place Place has_many :affiches We can do this now: @affiches = Affiche.all( :joins => :place ) or @affiches = Affiche.all( :include => :place ) and we will get a lot of extra SELECTs, if there are many affiches: Place Load (0.2ms) SELECT "places".* FROM "places" WHERE "places"."id" = 3 LIMIT 1 Place Load (0.3ms) SELECT "places".* FROM "places" WHERE "places"."id" = 3 LIMIT 1 Place Load (0.8ms) SELECT "places".* FROM "places" WHERE "places"."id" = 444 LIMIT 1 Place Load (1.0ms) SELECT "places".* FROM "places" WHERE "places"."id" = 222 LIMIT 1 ...and so on... And (sic!) with :joins used every SELECT is doubled! Technically we cloud just write like this: @affiches = Affiche.all( ) and the result is totally the same! (Because we have relations declared). The wayout of keeping all data in one query is removing the relations and writing a big string with "LEFT OUTER JOIN", but still there is a problem of grouping data in multy-dimentional array and a problem of similar column names, such as id. What is done wrong? Or what am I doing wrong? UPDATE: Well, i have that string Place Load (2.5ms) SELECT "places".* FROM "places" WHERE ("places"."id" IN (3,444,222,57,663,32,154,20)) and a list of selects one by one id. Strange, but I get these separate selects when I`m doing this in each scope: <%= link_to a.place.name, **a.place**( :id => a.place.friendly_id ) %> the marked a.place is the spot, that produces these extra queries.

    Read the article

  • Set database based on how the application was started

    - by AaronThomson
    I have two Rails applications (lets call them APP-1 and APP-2), each of them has a dependancy on a third Rails application (APP-3). I would like to be able to run the tests for APP-1 and APP-2 in parallel on my CI server. The problem is, both need to start up APP-3 and write to a DB via the APP-3. This causes conflicts and failures if the tests are run in parallel. My idea for a solution is for APP-1 and APP-2 to each start their own instance of APP-3 and to have each instance point to a different DB. Is there a way to dynamically set the DB in the database.yml of APP-3 so that it connects to a different DB depending on which APP starts it up? FYI. APP-1 and APP-2 currently start APP-3 via rake tasks.

    Read the article

  • acts_as_taggable_on and auto_complete returning no results

    - by Sean Johnson
    I'm using acts_as_taggable_on in a model, and am trying to implement the auto_complete plugin. It seems as though I have everything hooked up correctly, but the search isn't returning any results. Here's what I have so far: In the view: <%= text_field_with_auto_complete(:link, :tag_list, {}, {:tokens => ','}) %> In the controller: def auto_complete_for_link_tag_list @tags = Link.tag_counts_on(:tags).where('tags.name LIKE ?', params[:link][:tag_list]) render :inline => "<%= auto_complete_result(@tags, 'name') %>", :layout => false logger.info "#{@tags.size} tags found." end The logger keeps returning 0 tags, and nothing shows up in the view (yeah, the layout includes the javascript defaults). Any thoughts or advice would be awesome.

    Read the article

  • Rails - Active Record :conditions overrides :select

    - by Nick
    I have a fairly large model and I want to retrieve only a select set of fields for each record in order to keep the JSON string I am building small. Using :select with find works great but my key goal is to use conditional logic with an associated model. Is the only way to do this really with a lamda in a named scope? I'm dreading that perhaps unnecessarily but I'd like to understand if there is a way to make the :select work with a condition. This works: @sites = Site.find :all, :select => 'id,foo,bar' When I try this: @sites = Site.find :all, :select => 'id,foo,bar', :include => [:relatedmodel], :conditions => ["relatedmodel.type in (?)", params[:filters]] The condition works but each record includes all of the Site attributes which makes my JSON string way way too large. Thanks for any pointers!

    Read the article

  • Sorcery/Capybara: Cannon log in with :js => true

    - by PlankTon
    I've been using capybara for a while, but I'm new to sorcery. I have a very odd problem whereby if I run the specs without Capybara's :js = true functionality I can log in fine, but if I try to specify :js = true on a spec, username/password cannot be found. Here's the authentication macro: module AuthenticationMacros def sign_in user = FactoryGirl.create(:user) user.activate! visit new_sessions_path fill_in 'Email Address', :with => user.email fill_in 'Password', :with => 'foobar' click_button 'Sign In' user end end Which is called in specs like this: feature "project setup" do include AuthenticationMacros background do sign_in end scenario "creating a project" do "my spec here" end The above code works fine. However, IF I change the scenario spec from (in this case) scenario "adding questions to a project" do to scenario "adding questions to a project", :js => true do login fails with an 'incorrect username/password' combination. Literally the only change is that :js = true. I'm using the default capybara javascript driver. (Loads up Firefox) Any ideas what could be going on here? I'm completely stumped. I'm using Capybara 2.0.1, Sorcery 0.7.13. There is no javascript on the sign in page and save_and_open_page before clicking 'sign in' confirms that the correct details are entered into the username/password fields. Any suggestions really appreciated - I'm at a loss.

    Read the article

  • Rails: unexpected behavior updating a shared instance

    - by Pascal Lindelauf
    I have a User object, that is related to a Post object via two different association paths: Post --(has_many)-- comments --(belongs to)-- writer (of type User) Post --(belongs to)-- writer (of type User) Say the following hold: user1.name == "Bill" post1.comments[1].writer == user1 post1.writer == user1 Now when I retrieve the post1 and its comments from the database and I update post1.comments[1].writer like so: post1.comments[1].writer.name = "John" I would expect post1.writer to equal "John" too. But it doesn't! It still equals "Bill". So there seems to be some caching going on, but the kind I would not expect. I would expect Rails to be clever enough to load exactly one instance of the user with name "Bill"; instead is appears to load two individual ones: one for each association path. Can someone explain how this works exactly and how I am to handle these types of situations the "Rails way"?

    Read the article

  • Running a cucumber feature multiple times

    - by evomase
    Hi, I'm trying to run a cucumber feature multiple times (i.e 500 times). Is there a way of doing this than me having to type in the same command everytime? I'm guessing this can be done using Rake? I'm not an expert in using rake or cucumber. Will appreciate your help. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Problem with skipping login validation for authlogic

    - by Andrei
    Hi, I want to use email for signing in, and to allow users to have similar names. One way to do this is to rename login/username field to something different. However, I want to do it just by setting up authlogic. I tried the following acts_as_authentic do |c| c.login_field :email c.validate_login_field false c.validate_email_field true end but it still complains that the login already exists. What must be done to avoid username validation without renaming the field?

    Read the article

  • How to let a guest user start their workflow and prompt registration when they try to save their wor

    - by Brandon Cordell
    I'm wondering what I would do to go about letting a guest use my web application without registering, then if they attempt to save their work they are prompted with a registration. This will be in a rails application by the way. Can I just allow public access to part of the work flow, then when they save check if they're a registered user (by session value, or cookie?). If they aren't a registered user, save all their work into the session and let them fill out a sign out form. On successful registration automatically log them in and initiate the create on the db?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303  | Next Page >