I am trying to develop a reusable module for Active Record models to be used shared in models. It works well except child classes can't find the variables.
This is easier demonstrated with code
This is the module:
module Scanner
def self.included(base)
base.extend(ClassMethods)
end
module ClassMethods
def scan(*fields)
#scan = fields if fields.present?
#scan
end
end
end
Usage:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
include Scanner
scan :user_name
end
Calling User.scan returns :user_name. Perfect!
However. This is an issue:
class Admin < User
end
Calling Admin.scan returns nil
How come :user_name is not being set in the parent? I am following the source for AR for methods like primary_key and table_name, they seem to be inherting values from the parent
class_attribute takes care of the required inheritance semantics for you. As you've seen, it's not quite as simple as putting an instance variable on the class, because that leaves it nil on subclasses: they're instance variables, and that's a separate instance.
The examples you mention do other, more specialised and more complicated, things... but you'll find plenty of straightforward examples in the Rails source that do use class_attribute.
Related
I want to define 3 classes:
a MotherClass (abstract, can not be inferred)
a SubClassA (inherits from MotherClass)
a SubClassB (inherits from MotherClass)
What is the best solution to declare it in Rails ?
1. Put everything in app/models/
MotherClass < AR::Base in app/models/mother_class.rb
SubClassA < MotherClass in app_models/sub_class_a.rb
SubClassB < MotherClass in app/models/sub_class_b.rb
Advantage: not very complicated to implement
Inconvenient: a big mess in models folder
2. Create a module for the two subclasses
MotherClass < AR::Base in app/models/mother_class.rb
MotherModule::SubClassA < MotherClass in app/models/mother_module/sub_class_a.rb
MotherModule::SubClassB < MotherClass in app/models/mother_module/sub_class_b.rb
Advantage: same than Solution 1
Inconvenient: naming MotherModule and MotherClass with different names, but they mean almost the same thing
3. Create a module for the 3 classes
MotherModule::Base < AR::Base in app/models/mother_module/base.rb
MotherModule::SubClassA < MotherModule::Base in app/models/mother_module/sub_class_a.rb
MotherModule::SubClassB < MotherModule::Base in app/models/mother_module/sub_class_b.rb
Advantage: very clean
Inconvenient: need some functions in Base to override (table_name for example)
So my question is: What is the best practice in Rails and
- how to name my classes?
- what are their directories?
First of all, I think you must already realize that ruby does not have true abstract classes. But we can approximate the behavior. And while doing so, it sounds like you have a preference toward organizational structure which I will attempt to address.
I must start by saying, however, that I'm surprised that you're coming at the problem so strongly from the organizational angle. First on my mind would be whether I really wanted to implement single table inheritance or not and then let that drive the organizational problem. Usually the answer here is that Single Table Inheritance is not what you actually want. But... let's dive in!
Using Single Table Inheritance
Here's the standard way to utilize and organize models using Single Table Inheritance:
# app/models/mother_class.rb
class MotherClass < ActiveRecord::Base
# An "abstract" method
def method1
raise NotImplementedError, "Subclasses must define `method1`."
end
def method2
puts method1 # raises NotImplementedError if `method1` is not redefined by a subclass
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_a.rb
class SubClassA < MotherClass
def method1
# do something
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_b.rb
class SubClassB < MotherClass
def method1
# do something
end
end
Given the above, we would get an exception when calling MotherClass.new.method2 but not when calling SubClassA.new.method2 or SubClassB.new.method2. So we've satisfied the "abstract" requirements. Organizationally, you called this a big mess in the models folder... which I can understand if you've got tons of these subclasses or something. But, remember that in single table inheritance even then parent class is a model and is / should be usable as such! So, that said, if you'd really like to organize your models file system better then you are free to do so. For example, you could do:
app/models/<some_organizational_name>/mother_class.rb
app/models/<some_organizational_name>/sub_class_a.rb
app/models/<some_organizational_name>/sub_class_b.rb
In this, we are keeping all other things (i.e. the Code for each of these models) the same. We're not namespacing these models in any way, we're just organizing them. To make this work it's just a matter of helping Rails to find the models now that we've placed them in a subfolder of the models folder without any other clues (i.e. without namespacing them). Please refer to this other Stack Overflow post for this. But, in short, you simply need to add the following to your config/application.rb file:
config.autoload_paths += Dir[Rails.root.join('app', 'models', '{**/}')]
Using Mixins
If you decide that Single Table Inheritance is not what you want (and they often aren't, really) then mixins can give you the same quasi-abstract functionality. And you can, again, be flexible on file organization. The common, organizational pattern for mixins is this:
# app/models/concerns/mother_module.rb
module MotherModule
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
# An "abstract" method
def method1
raise NotImplementedError, "Subclasses must define `method1`."
end
def method2
puts method1 # raises NotImplementedError if `method1` is not redefined
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_a.rb
class SubClassA
include MotherModule
def method1
# do something
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_b.rb
class SubClassB
include MotherModule
def method1
# do something
end
end
With this approach, we continue to not get an exception when calling SubClassA.new.method2 or SubClassB.new.method2 because we've overridden these methods in the "subclasses". And since we can't really call MotherModule#method1 directly it is certainly an abstract method.
In the above organization, we've tucked MotherModule away into the models/concerns folder. This is the common location for mixins in Rails these days. You didn't mention what rails version you're on, so if you don't already have a models/concerns folder you'll want to make one and then make rails autoload models from there. This would, again, be done in config/application.rb with the following line:
config.autoload_paths += Dir[Rails.root.join('app', 'concerns', '{**/}')]
The organization with the mixins approach is, in my opinion, simple and clear in that SubclassA and SubClassB are (obviously) models and, since they include the MotherModule concern they get the behaviors of MotherModule. If you wanted to group the subclass models, organizationally, into a folder then you could still do this of course. Just use the same approach outlined at the end of the Single Table Inheritance section, above. But I'd probably keep MotherModule located in the models/concerns folder still.
Even though ruby doesn't really have abstract classes, it's powerful enough to let you implement it yourself by implementing self.included on a mixin module. Hopefully this generic example gives you enough to go on for your particular implementation.
module MotherInterface
def self.included base
required_class_methods = [:method1, :method2]
required_instance_methods = [:fizzle, :fazzle]
required_associations = [:traits, :whatevers]
required_class_methods.each do |cm|
raise "MotherInterface: please define .#{cm} class method on host class #{base.name}" unless base.respond_to?(cm)
end
required_instance_methods.each do |im|
raise "MotherInterface: please define ##{im} instance method on host class #{base.name}" unless base.instance_methods.include?(im)
end
required_associations.each do |ass|
raise "MotherInterface: please be sure #{base.name} has a :#{ass} association" unless base.reflections.key?(ass)
end
base.send :include, InstanceMethods
base.extend ClassMethods
end
# inherited instance methods
module InstanceMethods
def foo
end
def bar
end
end
# inherited class methods
module ClassMethods
def baz
end
def bat
end
end
end
class SubClassA < ActiveRecord::Base
include MotherInterface
# ... define required methods here ...
end
class SubClassB < ActiveRecord::Base
include MotherInterface
end
Some advantages to this approach are:
Yes, you can still technically instantiate the mixin, but it's not actually tied to active record, so it tastes more like an abstract class.
The sub classes get to define their own connection information. You have two databases? Differing columns? Cool, no problem. Just implement your instance methods and stuff appropriately.
The dividing line between parent and child is very obvious.
But, there are disadvantages too:
All the meta programming is a bit more complex. You'll have to think a little abstractly (HA!) about how to organize your code.
There are probably other advantages and disadvantages I haven't considered, kind of in a hurry here.
Now, as far as file locations, I would suggest that the mixin itself, presumably mother_interface.rb, go someplace other than your models folder.
In config/application.rb, throw in a line like this:
config.autoload_paths << File.join(Rails.root, 'app', 'lib')
...and then you can create (rails)/app/lib/mother_interface.rb. Really, you should do it however makes sense to you. I dislike the word "concerns" for this, and other people dislike the word "lib." So, use whatever word you like, or make up your own.
Using Single Table Inheritance with little bit meta programming
# app/models/mother_class.rb
class MotherClass < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.inherited(subclass)
subclass.include(OnlyChildMethods)
end
module OnlyChildMethods
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
included do
def child_method_one
puts 'hi one'
end
def child_method_two
puts 'hi two'
end
end
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_a.rb
class SubClassA < MotherClass
def some_specific_method
#some code
end
end
# app/models/sub_class_b.rb
class SubClassB < MotherClass
def some_specific_method
#some code
end
end
mother_class_instance.child_method_one
=> NoMethodError: undefined method 'child_method_one'
sub_class_a_instance.child_method_one
hi one
=> nil
I have several models that share a concern. Each model passes in a hash, which is meant to handle minor differences in the way they use the concern. I pass the hash in through a class method like so:
add_update_to :group, :user
The full code for the concern is:
module Updateable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
attr_accessor :streams
module ClassMethods
def add_updates_to(*streams)
#streams = streams
end
end
module InstanceMethods
def update_streams
#streams.collect{|stream| self.public_send(stream)}
end
end
included do
has_one :update, :as => :updatable
after_create :create_update_and_history
end
private
def create_update_and_history
update = self.create_update(:user_id => User.current.id)
self.update_streams.each do |stream|
stream.histories.create(:update_id => update.id)
end
end
end
Most of this code works, but I'm having trouble passing the hash from the class to an instance. At the moment, I'm trying to achieve this effect by creating a virtual attribute, passing the hash to the attribute, and then retrieving it in the instance. Not only does this feel hacky, it doesn't work. I'm assuming it doesn't work because #streams is an instance variable, so the class method add_update_to can't actually set it?
Whatever the case, is there a better way to approach this problem?
You could probably use class variables here, but those are pretty reviled in the Ruby community due to their unpredictable nature. The thing to remember is that classes in Ruby are actually also instances of classes, and can have their own instance variables that are only accessible to themselves, and not accessible to their instances (if that is in any way clear).
In this case, you are defining behavior, and not data, so I think neither instance nor class variables are appropriate. Instead, I think your best bet is to define the instance methods directly within the class method, like this:
module Updateable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ClassMethods
def add_updates_to(*streams)
define_method :update_streams do
streams.collect {|stream| public_send(stream) }
end
end
end
end
BTW, there is no hash involved here, so I'm not sure what you were referring to. *streams collects your arguments into an Array.
I'm in the process of writing an Importable concern for my rails project. This concern will provide a generic way for me to import a csv file into any model that includes Importable.
I need a way for each model to specify which field the import code should use to find existing records. Are there any recommended ways of adding this type of configuring for a concern?
A slightly more "vanilla-looking" solution, we do this (coincidentally, for the exactly some csv import issue) to avoid the need for passing arguments to the Concern. I am sure there are pros and cons to the error-raising abstract method, but it keeps all the code in the app folder and the models where you expect to find it.
In the "concern" module, just the basics:
module CsvImportable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
# concern methods, perhaps one that calls
# some_method_that_differs_by_target_class() ...
def some_method_that_differs_by_target_class()
raise 'you must implement this in the target class'
end
end
And in the model having the concern:
class Exemption < ActiveRecord::Base
include CsvImportable
# ...
private
def some_method_that_differs_by_target_class
# real implementation here
end
end
Rather than including the concern in each model, I'd suggest creating an ActiveRecord submodule and extend ActiveRecord::Base with it, and then add a method in that submodule (say include_importable) that does the including. You can then pass the field name as an argument to that method, and in the method define an instance variable and accessor (say for example importable_field) to save the field name for reference in your Importable class and instance methods.
So something like this:
module Importable
extend ActiveSupport::Concern
module ActiveRecord
def include_importable(field_name)
# create a reader on the class to access the field name
class << self; attr_reader :importable_field; end
#importable_field = field_name.to_s
include Importable
# do any other setup
end
end
module ClassMethods
# reference field name as self.importable_field
end
module InstanceMethods
# reference field name as self.class.importable_field
end
end
You'll then need to extend ActiveRecord with this module, say by putting this line in an initializer (config/initializers/active_record.rb):
ActiveRecord::Base.extend(Importable::ActiveRecord)
(If the concern is in your config.autoload_paths then you shouldn't need to require it here, see the comments below.)
Then in your models, you would include Importable like this:
class MyModel
include_importable 'some_field'
end
And the imported_field reader will return the name of the field:
MyModel.imported_field
#=> 'some_field'
In your InstanceMethods, you can then set the value of the imported field in your instance methods by passing the name of the field to write_attribute, and get the value using read_attribute:
m = MyModel.new
m.write_attribute(m.class.imported_field, "some value")
m.some_field
#=> "some value"
m.read_attribute(m.class.importable_field)
#=> "some value"
Hope that helps. This is just my personal take on this, though, there are other ways to do it (and I'd be interested to hear about them too).
I do know it is a namespace thing ... can anyone give me some sample code ... i understand things fast with sample code ... thanks!
A module in ruby can be used for 3 possible things
1. Namespacing
This is pretty straight forward.
module Foo
class Bar
end
end
f = Foo::Bar.new
2. Collection of functions
Sometimes, you will have some functions that don't really fit in any class. In something like java, you would just put them as a bunch of static methods on a class. In ruby, you would put them on a module, since having them on a class implies the class is intended to be instanciated
module FooHelper
def self.bar
puts 'hi'
end
end
FooHelper.bar # => hi
3. Mixins
This is the hardest to understand of all 3. Basically, it is rubys answer to multiple inheritance in C, or interfaces in java.
Sometimes you have logic which belongs in several classes, but at the same time doesn't fit as a parent class. A mixin describes "mixing" a modules methods into a class. There is actually a lot more to this, but at an extremely high level, it would look like this
module CanFoo
def foo
puts 'bar'
end
end
class Baz
include CanFoo
end
class Bar
include CanFoo
end
baz.new.foo # => bar
bar.new.foo # => bar
mixins are a fairly advanced topic, and it takes a bit of time to understand when you would use one over a super class. IMO they are one of the coolest features of ruby though, and handles the multiple inheritance problem with a great deal more elegance then any other OO language I have looked at.
A module is a collection of constants, class and functions inside a namespace. Here is an example:
module Payments
CARD_TYPES = ["visa", "mastercard"]
class CreditCard
attr_accessor :number
attr_accessor :type
end
extend self
def process_payment
...
end
end
I now have a Payments module. I can call Payments::CARD_TYPES to get an array; Payments::CreditCard.new to create an object and Payments::process_payment to call a function.
I have an issue with Ruby on Rails.
I have several model classes that inherit from the same class in order to have some generic behaviour.
The parent class is called CachedElement.
One of the child is called Outcome.
I want an other model, called Flow to belong to any child of CachedElement.
Hence Flow has a polymorphic attributes called element, to which it belongs_to
When I create a new flow, that belongs to an Outcome, the element_type is set to "CachedElement" which is the parent class, instead of "Outcome".
This is confusing because since I have several type of CachedElement which are stored in different tables, the element_id refers to several different element.
In short I would like the element_type field to refer to the child class name and not the parent class name.
How can I do that ?
The field element_type is set to the parent class because ActiveRecord expects you to use single-table inheritance when deriving from other models. The field will reference the base class because it refers to the table that each instance is stored in.
If the children of CachedElement are stored in their own tables, it may be more helpful to replace the use of inheritance with the use of Ruby modules. The standard approach for sharing logic between classes is to use mix-ins instead of inheritance. For example:
module Cacheable
# methods that should be available for all cached models
# ...
end
class Outcome < ActiveRecord::Base
include Cacheable
# ...
end
You can now easily use polymorphic associations as you have been doing already, and element_type will be set to the proper class.
the file should go on you lib folder. but...
you could do the inheritance thing as well.
all you need to do is to tell you parent class to act as an abstract class.
# put this in your parent class then try to save a polymorphic item again.
# and dont forget to reload, (I prefer restart) if your gonna try this in
# your console.
def self.abstract_class?
true
end
and thats pretty much it, this was kinda unespected for me and actually really
hard to find in the documentation and anywhere else.
Kazuyoshi Tlacaelel.
Thanks, that's what I did, but it was kind of tricky to be able to inherits both instance and class methods from the module
Class methods can be done by:
module Cachable
def self.included(base)
base.extend(ClassMethods)
end
module ClassMethods
def a_class_method
"I'm a class method!"
end
end
def an_instance_method
"I'm an instance method!"
end
end
class Outcome < ActiveRecord::Base
include Cacheable
end
if you want to add class methods and instance methods through a mixin (Module)
then I recommend you to abstract these in different modules.
module FakeInheritance
def self.included(klass)
klass.extend ClassMethods
klass.send(:include, InstanceMethods)
end
module ClassMethods
def some_static_method
# you dont need to add self's anywhere since they will be merged into the right scope
# and that is very cool because your code is more clean!
end
end
module InstanceMethods
# methods in here will be accessable only when you create an instance
end
end
# fake inheritance with static and instance methods
class CachedElement
include FakeInheritance
end