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.
Related
My situation I have a "Parent" model and controller. I want to know the best practice for adding independent pages such as a dashboard for users. My thought is that I can create a view dashboard.html.erb and inside the parent controller create a method of:
Parent controller
def dashboard
end
Routes.rb
get 'parents/dashboard'
I've done this once and it worked fine, but is was for a 'child' model.
When I run this same situation in the parent model I get the error
ActiveRecord::RecordNotFound in ParentsController#show
Couldn't find Parent with 'id'=dashboard
1.) All I've done is add a view, added the dashboard model to the controller, and placed get 'parents/dashboard' into the routes.rb and it tries to reference the show method??? Why?
2.) And is this the wrong way to add pages/actions to a rails application?
Do this:
#config/routes.rb
resources :parents do
get :dashboard, on: :collection #-> url.com/parents/dashboard
end
And is this the wrong way to add pages/actions to a rails application?
It's not "wrong", it's just ineffective, as demonstrated by your problem.
The problem you have is you've included your custom route below the resources :parents route. Because resources creates a /:id url which captures any requests sent to parents/:id, your "dashboard" request is being sent to the show action of the parents controller:
There are two remedies to your issue:
Put get 'parents/dashboard' above the resources :parents directive
Include an additional route to resources :parents (above)
You must remember that Rails matches your request with a route. That means the first route to match your request is processed.
So if you have...
#config/routes.rb
resources :parents
get "parents/dashboard"
... Rails will assume the dashboard is the :id in url.com/parents/:id, thus sending the request to show.
Apart from the very top code (the recommended answer), you could have the following:
#config/routes.rb
get "parents/dashboard", to: :dashboard
resources :parents
If you want to add an additional route with an :id then the syntax is different.
get 'parent_dashboard/:id', to: 'parents#dashboard'
Notice that the person string after get. This is used as the address of the website, when the user hits this, it would go to localhost:3000/parent_dashboard/1 if it is the first dashboard. You can exclude :id if you'd like. Of course, this would be different from the use case.
The second part of the route syntax is the :to, this method tells your app which controller and method to look at.
Hope this helps!
If you want to add a new view to the parents folder. Just do this:
parents_controller.rb
def dashboard
#parent = Parent.find(params[:id])
end
routes.rb
get '/parents/:id/dashboard', to: 'parents#dashboard', as: :parents_dashboards
resources :parents
Then in your parents/dashboard.html.erb view you can do everything that you can do in the parents/show view.
The link to your dashboard view would be parents_dashboards_path and you might have to use parents_dashboards_path(#parent) or parents_dashboards_path(parent) in certain circumstances.
This is an example of a custom path that works without using nested resources to accomplish access to the parent's dashboard.
I am using this approach in a project so I would like to hear any critique or comments on this approach. PEACE I'M OUTTA HERE!
The guide Rails Routing from the Outside In has a section named Adding Routes for Additional New Actions in chapter 2, Resource Routing: the Rails Default, with this example:
resources :comments do
get 'preview', on: :new
end
which generates the following route:
Prefix Verb URI Pattern Controller#Action
preview_new_comment GET /comments/new/preview(.:format) comments#preview
The same result can be achieved at least in two other ways:
1) Adding a collection route inside resources :comments like get 'new/preview', to: :preview, on: :collection (if you don't bother about the route name)
2) Adding just this route to the corresponding singular resource:
resource :comment, only: :preview do
get 'new/preview', to: :preview, as: 'preview_new', on: :collection
end
which has exactly the same behavior.
So why there is a on: :new option? Is it just a shortcut? If it is, why it's just for 'new actions' and there are not any similar options for the other default REST actions, like on: :edit or on: :delete?
This is a shortcut that is unique to the RESTful action new, in which an object is instantiated but not yet persisted.
For example, if you are filling out a form for a new object, you would provide yourself with a link_to "preview", which sends all of the attributes to your preview action (instead of directly to create). This is similar to a show view, but for an object that only exists in memory.
This functionality isn't logical for destroy, update, index, show or create. I suppose you could use a preview on an edit action after assigning new attributes before sending to update, but you'd have to create the route manually.
Actually there is a subtle difference.
If you add it to the resources :comments the path helper generated has a pluralized resource name so it will be preview_new_comments and the path will be /comments/new/preview. If you add it to the corresponding singular resource it doesn't pluralize the resource name in the path so you get /comment/new/preview but the helper will be preview_new_comment. Using :on will generate the path helper with the singular resource preview_new_comment but the route will have the pluralized resource /comments/new/preview.
To get the same behaviour you could use the following more verbose route outside the resource
get 'collections/new/preview', to: 'collections#preview', as: :preview_new_comment, on: :collection
I'm not sure why there is no on: :<action other than new> option. They advise against having too many new actions in the documentation but if you are going to have a new 'new' it seems a reasonable possibility you might need an new 'edit' to edit your new 'new'. However, things become more complicated because to edit you would need a path like collections/<id>/edit/preview and the path helper of the solution above stops working as you might expect. More importantly at this stage maybe you start veering away from the original intention of the option.
I am someone who has always liked sinatra better than rails, and has never had to do a large enough scale project that rails was required (all the sources I have read say that rails is better for larger scale projects) and now I do have to do a large scale project. I have gotten very confused with the url structure of rails. What I am trying to do is the rails equivalent of this:
get "/" do
erb :index
end
get "/home" do
erb :dashboard
end
get "/home/profile" do
erb :profile
end
get "/home/friends" do
erb :friends
end
In the first one I understand that I should put in app/routes.rb I should put root home#index and in the home controller I should put def index end.
In the second one, I understand that I should do the same except replacing index with home.
But for the third and forth ones I have no idea what to do.
Also, is the a RESTful way to do the first two?
You probably want something like this
root 'home#index'
get 'home' => 'home#dashboard'
get 'home/profile' => 'home#profile'
get 'home/friends' => 'home#friends'
remember to use the command rake routes to see all your routes, where they lead and what their names are (if they have any)
I never understood what RESTful means, so someone else will have to answer that part of your question.
K M Rakibul Islam has shown you what can be called a "resourceful" way to do routes (because it uses the keyword resources) but it looks like you're just doing the static pages at this stage, so it's not necessary.
The simplest way to do routes is with this formula:
method url => controller::action, as: route_name
where method can be get, post, patch or delete so you can have different actions linked to the same URL depending on the method the request uses.
Putting a name on the route is optional, but it gives you a clean way to use the route in your views (route_name_path)
When you start making models then you'll find that using the resources keyword comes in handy. Read about it.
You can have this:
resources :home do
collection do
get :profile
end
collection do
get :friends
end
end
end
This will give you routes like this:
profile_home_index GET /home/profile(.:format) home#profile
friends_home_index GET /home/friends(.:format) home#friends
The standard way of declaring the root path:
root 'home#index'
And for the 2nd one, you have to do:
get 'home' => 'home#dashboard'
which will give you this route:
GET /home(.:format) home#dashboard
One route can be defined in many ways that works. But, Rails has conventions that should be followed while defining routes in your Rails app.
I would highly recommend you to take a look at the Rails Routing Guide
I have a polymorphic association between Posts and Postables, right now with Projects being my only Postables. In my routes, I have:
resources :projects do
...
member do
resources :posts
end
end
I know how to retrieve the right ids from the parameters, and all of my controller specs pass just fine, but when I try to write links in my views, they don't work. Running rake routes, I see a little weirdness:
...
post SHOW /projects/:id/posts/:id(.:format) posts#edit
...
And so on for the rest. If I'm not mistaken, the path should be 'new_project_post', and the first parameter should be :project_id.
Now, in my show view for Projects, I have the index of posts for that particular project. But the links don't work. Lets assume I have a project with an ID of 2, and a post for that project with an ID of 1.
If I try link_to 'Edit', edit_post_path(#project, post), the link comes out as .../projects/1/posts/1/edit, so both :ids get the post's id. If I swap post and #project, both :ids will be the project's id.
If I try passing them as an array, link_to 'Edit', post_path([post, #project]), the resulting link will be .../projects/1%2F2/posts/1%2F2/edit. %2F is a URL-encoded slash character, so I'm not sure what the hell Rails is trying to do here.
If I try using polymorphic_path([#project, post]) for my links, all it does is spit out paths that don't exist: undefined method 'project_post_path'
I've tried several other combinations of parameters without success. So if anyone could point me in the right direction, I'd be extremely grateful.
The appropriate syntax for nested resources in Rails is:
resources :projects do
resources :posts
end
In member block you could only declare additional actions to work with project instances.
You are using nested resource inside member and it is incorrect. Read more about this here: http://thelazylog.com/posts/polymorphic-routes-in-rails
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