I am looking to set the show action for a controller to a specific path (a path without the controller prefix). I know this can be done by controller by doing this
resources :items, path: ''
But is there a way to do this on only one specific action within the controller?
My end goal is to be able to say www.example.com/my-item-name and take the user to the item without changing the URL. I tried using a catchall route but redirecting adds the prefix back which I do not want.
Any ideas?
You can specify which controller and action respond to a certain route in your routes.rb file, like this:
get 'something', to: 'controller_name#action_name'
See Rails Routing Guide.
You can define single routes manually with the match, get,post, put, macros:
get :bar, to: 'foos#bar'
get :bar, controller: 'foos' # works the same as above
post :bar, to: 'foos#bar'
You can also use scope if you want to route multiple routes to the same controller more elegantly:
scope controller: 'foos' do
get :bar
get :baz
end
Related
I hope the title is not to misleading, as I don't know a better title for the problem I'm working on:
I have a doctor which belongs to location and specialty. I'd like to route to show action of the doc controller like this:
/dentist/berlin/7
I defined my routes like this:
get ':specialty/:location/:id', to: 'docs#show'
And in my views create the following url to link to the show action of the doc controller:
<%= link_to doc.name, "#{doc.specialty.name}/#{doc.location.name}/#{doc.id}" %>
Is this a good solution to the problem? If not, is there a cleaner way to construct urls like this possibly using resources? What the heck is the name for a this problem?
Thank your very much for your help in advance.
For references, you should have a look at this page (especially the end of section 2.6)
If it is only for a single route, it's okay as you did. But then if you want to have more than one route (like /dentist/berlin/7, /dentist/berlin/7/make_appointment, etc.) you might want to structure a bit more your routes so as to take advantage of rails resources.
For example, instead of
get ':specialty/:location/:id', to: 'doctors#show'
get ':specialty/:location/:id/appointment', to: 'doctors#new_appointment'
post ':specialty/:location/:id/appointment', to: 'doctors#post_appointment'
You could have something like this (the code is almost equivalent, see explanation below)
resources :doctors, path: '/:specialty/:location', only: [:show] do
member do
get 'new_appointment'
post 'create_appointment'
end
end
Explanation
resources will generate the RESTful routes (index, show, edit, new, create, destroy) for the specified controller (doctors_controller I assume)
The 'only' means you don't want to add all the RESTful routes, just the ones specified
Then you want to add member actions, ie. actions that can be executed on a particular item of the collection. You can chose different syntaxes
resources :doctors do
member do
# Everything here will have the prefix /:id so the action applies to a particular item
end
end
# OR
resources :doctors do
get 'new_appointement', on: :member
end
By default, the controller action is the same as the path name you give, but you can also override it
member do
get 'appointment', action: 'new_appointment'
post 'appointment', action: 'post_appointment'
end
Rails has some wonderful helpers when it comes to routing !
The correct approach is to give your route a name, like this:
get ':specialty/:location/:id', to: 'docs#show', as: 'docs_show'
Then you can use it like this:
<%= link_to doc.name, docs_show_path(doc.specialty.name, doc.location.name, doc.id) %>
Note 1:
Rails appends _path at the end of the route names you define.
Note 2:
You can see all the available named routes by executing rake routes.
As of Rails 4.2, I cannot do the following:
get 'profile', to: 'profile#index', as: 'profile'
get 'profile/:slug', to: 'profile#show', as: 'profile'
because it will raise error saying route is already defined. Why is that? Obviously profile_path and profile_path(User.last.slug) are not the same, and there should be no difficulty differentiating the two even if they happen to share the same base name (You check if a param is passed).
Thoughts?
In rails, the helper names for different routes should be different. And hence, as you rightly understood, you will receive an error if you use the same helper name (ie as: 'profile' in your case) for two different routes.
This restriction in Rails helps maintain sanity in your routes.rb file as well as in your application. For instance consider two methods for a controller:
class XyzController < ApplicationController
def method_a(param1)
end
def method_b(param1)
end
end
In your routes file if there was no restriction of keeping helper names different, you could have used :
get 'xyz/method_a', to: 'profile#method_a', as: 'profile_method'
get 'xyz/method_b', to: 'profile#method_b', as: 'profile_method'
Correspondingly in your view file:
link_to 'link_1', profile_method_path('param1') #intended to route for method_a
link_to 'link_2', profile_method_path('param2') #intended to route for method_b
As obvious, in the view file, not only is it difficult to make out which route is intended for which method, its also not possible to route to any other controller method using the helper 'profile_method' except the method that is first to use this helper in your routes.rb file (as routes are read sequentially).
Hope this helps :)
For both routes you specified as: 'profile' and that's your problem here. Besides that, use pluralized route names for #index action, e.g:
get 'profiles', to: 'profile#index'
I want to implement a search function in the controller, which contains "show, new, create, etc..."
I added in route.rb:
get 'apps/search' => 'apps#search'
and in apps_controller.rb:
def show
#app_info = App.find(params[:id])
end
def search
# get parameter and do search function
end
but each time when i request the /apps/search?xxx=xxx then it will be rendered by show... and then search?xxx=xxx is the parameter for method show...
should I rather create a new controller for search? Or is it possible to implement search as my requirements?
Your routes are incorrectly prioritized - somewhere else in your routes file (before the get 'apps/search' line) you have resources :apps, which defines a route that matches the same regex as apps/search.
Routes match from top to bottom, so if you check the output of rake routes, you'll see that your request to apps/search is actually matching apps/:id - which is the show route of your apps resource.
Either move the apps/search route above the resources :apps declaration, or alternatively declare your search route as part of the apps resource, eg.
resources :apps do
get :search, on: :collection
end
(this will define apps/search in the way you want).
For more information on routing: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html
I think you should edit route.rb as the following:
get 'apps/search' => 'apps#show'
The Rails' way to "say" search is a new route to the apps controller is using collection. So, for example, supposing you already have a resources :apps, you can do:
resources :apps do
get 'search', on: :collection #or you can use another HTTP verb instead of get
end
And that would give you:
search_apps GET /apps/search(.:format) apps#search
This is my first Rails project, I am trying to piece things together slowly.
When I'm trying to view the page I generated using rails g controller <controller> <page>, I find myself going to 0.0.0.0:3000/controller/page.html, How can I configure it so that my route file globally allows viewing the page via the page name, rather than controller/page, if no such way exists, then how can I route controller/page.html to /page.html
I've looked around, and haven't really found any explanation, maybe I'm looking in the wrong places?
In config/routes.rb:
get '/page' => 'controller#action'
If your controller is:
class UsersController < ApplicationController
def something
end
end
Then config/routes.rb would be:
get '/page' => 'users#something'
For static pages you could want to use public folder though, everything you put there is directly accessible, for example public/qqqqqq.html would be accessed in localhost:3000/qqqqqq.html
We've just achieved this by using the path argument in resources method:
#config/routes.rb
resources :controller, path: ""
For you specifically, you'll want to make something like this:
#config/routes.rb
resources :static_pages, path: "", only: [:index]
get :page
get :other_page
end
#app/controllers/your_controller.rb
def page
end
def other_page
end
This will give you routes without the controller name. You'll have to define this at the end of your routes (so other paths come first)
Obviously this will form part of a wider routes file, so if it doesn't work straight up, we can refactor!
It sounds like this is a static page, so you can do as juanpastas says, or another option is to create a folder under your app/views directory to hold these pages. Maybe something like
app/views/static_pages/the_page.html.erb
Then in your config/routes.rb you can add:
match '/your_page_name', to: 'static_pages#the_page', via: :get
I'm looking to "automatically" generate routes based on actions defined in a controller. resources routing (as far as I know) only automatically generates routes & helpers for http verbs. In this instance I'm serving mostly static pages using rails and have no need for http verbs in my controller.
Specifically:
In a controller I have defined actions which refer to those mostly static pages.
def action
end
In the routes file I have a bunch of
match "/url" => 'controller#action'
I'd like all those matched routes to be generated automatically based on the actions in the controller. Something CONCEPTUALLY along the lines of:
for actions in controller.erb do |action|
'match "/action" => "controller#action"
end
Is this possible? Would I write the code in the routes file directly?
I also have some nested actions to consider... a controller action may be:
def action
def nested_action
end
end
I'd appreciate any thoughts on this matter. Thanks.
What's wrong with the normal /:controller/:action idea?
That won't deal with nested actions, but... I'm having a difficult time understanding why you'd ever want that.
You can do something like this:
controller :controller_name do
get "path/action" => :method_name, :as => :path_action
post "path/save" => :method_name, :as => :path_save
end
That is, you can group different routes within a controller using the method above.