I'm trying to set up dynamic routing in a Rails 5.1.4 api. Originally, I had all my dynamic routes pointing to a single action, which works just fine. The problem came when I attempted to use the swagger-docs gem, which requires a separate action for each entry in order to generate the necessary json for swagger ui. So, I figured I could simply dynamically create the methods and point the routes at them. As far as I can tell, the methods are not being created and I don't understand why. Even if I drop my debugger into the loop that cycles through my sections, it never gets triggered. I deeply appreciate any help on this.
routes.rb
Section.active.all.each do |section|
get "/#{section.url}", :to => "sections##{section.url}", defaults: { id: section.id }
end
sections_controller.rb
class SectionsController < ApplicationController
Section.active.all do |section|
define_method :"#{section.url}" do
#some things
end
end
end
development.rb
config.eager_load = true
If I call:
SectionsController.action_methods
=> #<Set: {}>
I ended up just making the section_url a param, pointing everything to the show action and adding the possible section urls in the docs description.
routes.rb
get "/:section_url", to: "sections#show"
#must be at the end of the routes definitions
sections_controller.rb
swagger_api :show do
summary "Returns Section Items"
param :path, :section_url, :string, :required, Section.active.pluck(:url).join(", ")
response :ok
response :not_found
end
Related
Apologies for the basic question, but I'm trying to create an endpoint so I can a TranslationApi in my backend via my VueJs frontend via Fetch, so I need to make an endpoint I can insert. I'm attempting to create a route to make that happen, however when I run bin/rails routes | grep CcApiController I receive the following error:
ArgumentError: 'CcApiController' is not a supported controller name. This can lead to potential routing problems. See http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html#specifying-a-controller-to-use
I've read the documentation linked, but I'm not managing to fix this, can someone explain where I'm going wrong here? I'll link the files I've changed below:
cc_apis_controller.rb
module Panel
class CcApisController < CcenterBaseController
def index
run Ccenter::Adapters::Zendesk::TranslationApi.call(2116449)
end
end
end
panel_routes.rb
def draw_api_routes
resources: CcApiController
end
routes.rb
Rails.application.routes.draw do
resources :CcApiController, only: [:index]
end
API method I need to create Route for:
def make_request
response = Faraday.post('https://api.deepl.com/v2/translate', auth_key: '', text: #final_ticket, target_lang: 'DE', source_lang: 'EN')
if response.status == 200
body = response.body
message_element = body.split('"')[-2]
return message_element
else
raise InvalidResponseError unless response.success?
end
end
The answer to that is pretty simple.
Route names are snake_case, and match the controller's file name just omit the _controller suffix. In your case it is
Rails.application.routes.draw do
namespace :panel do
resources :cc_apis, only: %i[index]
end
end
For more info check this documentation and this article.
In my rails application I add an "api" area with controllers
In the route.rb file
I add the area
namespace :api do
#get "dashboard/sales_rate"
end
The controllers Class:
class Api::DashboardController < Api::ApplicationController
before_filter :authenticate_user!
def user_service
render :json => {"user_id" => current_user.id}
end
The Path is:
app/controllers/api/dashboard_controller
My question is if I can that the route take all action
for example /api/dashboard/user_service
and I will not add for each route row on the route.rb page
/api/{controller_under_api_namespace}/{action}
You can do with some meta programming sprinkle!
Api.constants.each |c|
c.action_methods.each do |action|
get [c.controller_name, action].join('/')
end
end
This method limits only to GET request. You can overcome it with RESTful routing.
Api.constants.each |c|
resources c.controller_name.to_sym
end
Hope, that helps. :)
I try add the code on the route.rb file
and I got this error
This is my file
But before trying to fix this part of code, I want to know if it's can change the performance or the calls to those pages?
If it not good for the performance I leave this option.
I am a Rails newbie and am struggling with appears to be a routing bug.
I have a Site object that holds information about a website and how to crawl it. I want to test my code's connection to the site. Clicking "test site" in my app creates an error:
Couldn't find Site without an ID
app/controllers/sites_controller.rb:86:in `test_site'
routes.rb:
...
post "/test_site" => "sites#test_site"
get "home/index"
resources :sites, :logins
...
index.html.erb
...
<% #sites.each do |site| %>
<tr>
<td>
<%= form_tag test_site_path(site) do -%>
<div><%= submit_tag 'Test site' %></div>
<% end -%>
...
sites_controller.rb
...
def test_site
#site = Site.find(params[:id])
...
It looks like the Sites controller is not getting a Site :id from test_site_path(site). I'm not sure how to setup routes and pass the ID correctly.
Thanks!
Edit: I tried adding this code to my routes.rb:
resources :sites do
get "/test_site", :action => "test_site", :on => :member
end
I get this error:
No route matches {:controller=>"sites", :action=>"test_site", :format=>#<Site id: 11, ...
What might I be doing wrong?
For a newbie the best thing I can tell you to do is to get in the process of writing a controller test when you are adding a new feature as it helps debug issue like this. Use restful actions instead of creating your own. Try to use index, new, edit, create, update, show, destroy instead.
sites_controller_spec.rb
require 'spec_helper'
describe SitesController do
let(:site) { Site.create() } #Add to create what a site requires, eventually this will become a fixture but don't worry about that now
describe "#show" do
before { get :show, id: site.to_param }
it "responds with success" do
response.should be_success
end
end
end
Run this test. It will tell you that you have no route
routes.rb
resources :sites, only: %w[show]
Run this test. It will fail and tell you to create a sites controller and a show action:
class SitesController < ApplicationController
def show
end
end
Run the test again. It will now complain because there is no view.
View -> create directory (sites) -> inside create a file show.html.erb
Run the test again. It now is passing. Your routing is now working correctly, using REST, and checking that it is working is now automated.
This may seem a bit imitating right now, but I guarantee that if you make this a habit it will become second nature and you won't have to deal with routing bugs again.
I'm writing controller tests in Rails and RSpec, and it seems from reading the source code of ActionController::TestCase that it's not possible to pass arbitrary query parameters to the controller -- only routing parameters.
To work around this limitation, I am currently using with_routing:
with_routing do |routes|
# this nonsense is necessary because
# Rails controller testing does not
# pass on query params, only routing params
routes.draw do
get '/users/confirmation/:confirmation_token' => 'user_confirmations#show'
root :to => 'root#index'
end
get :show, 'confirmation_token' => CONFIRMATION_TOKEN
end
As you may be able to guess, I am testing a custom Confirmations controller for Devise. This means I am jacking into an existing API and do not have the option to change how the real mapping in config/routes.rb is done.
Is there a neater way to do this? A supported way for get to pass query parameters?
EDIT: There is something else going on. I created a minimal example in https://github.com/clacke/so_13866283 :
spec/controllers/receive_query_param_controller_spec.rb
describe ReceiveQueryParamController do
describe '#please' do
it 'receives query param, sets #my_param' do
get :please, :my_param => 'test_value'
assigns(:my_param).should eq 'test_value'
end
end
end
app/controllers/receive_query_param_controller.rb
class ReceiveQueryParamController < ApplicationController
def please
#my_param = params[:my_param]
end
end
config/routes.rb
So13866283::Application.routes.draw do
get '/receive_query_param/please' => 'receive_query_param#please'
end
This test passes, so I suppose it is Devise that does something funky with the routing.
EDIT:
Pinned down where in Devise routes are defined, and updated my example app to match it.
So13866283::Application.routes.draw do
resource :receive_query_param, :only => [:show],
:controller => "receive_query_param"
end
... and spec and controller updated accordingly to use #show. The test still passes, i.e. params[:my_param] is populated by get :show, :my_param => 'blah'. So, still a mystery why this does not happen in my real app.
Controller tests don't route. You are unit-testing the controller--routing is outside its scope.
A typical controller spec example tests an action:
describe MyController do
it "is successful" do
get :index
response.status.should == 200
end
end
You set up the test context by passing parameters to get, e.g.:
get :show, :id => 1
You can pass query parameters in that hash.
If you do want to test routing, you can write routing specs, or request (integration) specs.
Are you sure there isn't something else going on? I have a Rails 3.0.x project and am passing parameters.. well.. this is a post.. maybe it's different for get, but that seems odd..
before { post :contact_us, :contact_us => {:email => 'joe#example.com',
:category => 'Category', :subject => 'Subject', :message => 'Message'} }
The above is definitely being used in my controller in the params object.
I am doing this now:
#request.env['QUERY_STRING'] = "confirmation_token=" # otherwise it's ignored
get :show, :confirmation_token => CONFIRMATION_TOKEN
... but it looks hacky.
If someone could show me a neat and official way to do this, I would be delighted. Judging from what I've seen in the source code of #get and everything it calls, there doesn't seem to be any other way, but I'm hoping I overlooked something.
I am developing a app in ruby on rails for a local business. The pages are 'static', but changeable through a backend CMS I am building for them. Is there a best practice to creating a controller for static pages? Right now I have a sites controller with all static routes, like this.
routes.rb
get "site/home"
get "site/about_us"
get "site/faq"
get "site/discounts"
get "site/services"
get "site/contact_us"
get "site/admin"
get "site/posts"
or would I be better off creating member routes for the site controller like this without the crud, because a 'Site' will not need to have the CRUD.
resources :sites, :except => [:index, :new, :create, :update, :destroy]
member do
get :home
get :about_us
get :faq
get :discounts
get :services
get :contact_us
get :admin
get :posts
end
Or is there a best practice / better way? Any answers would be appreciated. Thanks
If the static pages list are not going to increase, then you can keep the list, but if you want a dynamic list like site/any_new_url , save the routes as
get 'site/:cms_page' => 'cms#show' # all requests matching site/any_page will go CmsController, show method
This will help reduce keep the routes from bloating, but the downside is you do not know what all routes are the valid ones. Your sample code can be
def show
#page_data = Page.find_by_page(:params[:cms_page])
end
show.html.erb
<%= #page_data.html_safe %>
Dunno yet if I consider this a best practice or an abomination but here is what I came up with when tackling the same problem.
My reasoning is that the site was providing some specified functionality (which doesn't really matter for this discussion) + a bunch of information about the organisation itself (about us, contact, FAQ, homepage blurb, whatever). Since all that data was really related to the organisation, an Organisation model seemed reasonable with each of those things as attributes. Here is the model:
class Organisation < ActiveRecord::Base
...validations stuff...
def self.attrs_regex
Regexp.new(self.attrs.join("|"))
end
def self.attrs
self.column_names.reject{|name| name =~ /id|created_at|updated_at/}
end
end
Then I use the attrs class method to generate routes based on the columns. This is in my routes.rb:
Organisation.attrs.each do |attr|
get "#{attr}" => "organisation##{attr}", :as => attr.to_sym
get "#{attr}/edit" => "organisation#edit", :as => "#{attr}_edit".to_sym, :defaults => { :attribute => attr }
post "#{attr}" => "organisation#update", :as => :organisation_update, :defaults => { :attribute => attr}, :constraints => Organisation.attrs_regex
end
The controller gets a little weird and I am not thrilled with the code here but here it is anyway. I need to make sure the attribute is set and available to the views so I can do the right thing there so I set it in the application controller:
class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
protect_from_forgery
before_filter :set_attribute
def set_attribute
#attribute = action_name.parameterize
end
end
For the organisation controller I just set the #organisation variable to be the first and only row in the database in the before_filter and then let Rails do its usual magic of calling the method, failing, and rendering a view of the same name. The edit action just uses one view file to edit all the different attributes:
class OrganisationController < ApplicationController
before_filter :set_organisation
def edit
authorize! :edit, #organisation
#attribute = params[:attribute].parameterize
end
def update
authorize! :update, #organisation
#attribute = params[:attribute]
respond_to do |format|
if #organisation.update_attributes(params[:organisation])
format.html do
redirect_to "/#{#attribute}", notice: t('successful_update')
end
format.json { head :ok }
else
format.html { render action: "edit" }
end
end
end
private
def set_organisation
#organisation = Organisation.first
end
end
So that is where I ended up. Like you I hit up SO to tap into the seething mass of genius here but ended up with disappointing results. If there is something better out there I am still hoping to find it.
What I like about what I did is that routes are automatically generated based on the structure of the organisation table.
What I don't like about what I did is that routes automatically generated based on the structure of the organisation table.
I know I will pay for that design decision when I have to deal with i18n routing and there are probably a thousand other reasons that this is a bad idea that I have yet to discover but for the moment I have a happy client.
In the end this is not a suggestion that you should do this, but I am hoping to give you more than I got so you can advance your thinking on this and hopefully end up a little closer to that best practice.
If you are going to construct a CMS, which likely connects to a database, and allow your customer to change the text on the pages of their site, I would not recommend using static pages. In Rails terms, a static page would refer to creating html files in your /views/pages directory. If you go this route, then you're walking outside of the way that Rails was designed.
I believe that what you want to do is create tables in the database that correspond to and store the data for your posts, etc. You can pull information into the controller from the model that it corresponds to and then user a view to display the data. You can create a layout for these pages and then create controllers for each of the pages that you add.
As far as routes, I would recommend using the following:
map.resource :controller_name
you then would add the code that displays the information from the CMS in the corresponding show controller action and view for each page.