Ruby on Rails 4.2+ only, please!
I've been looking all over for tips on how to make URLs pretty in Rails, and I'm struggling to see a solution I like.
What I want:
Hypothetical example: given Topic, Course, etc. models that have a bunch of fields (including URL-friendly slugs), I want to be able to
# ../routes.rb
# Match urls of the form /edu/material-engineering. These are read-only
# public URLs, not resources.
get 'edu/:slug', to: 'education#topic', as: :learn_topic
get 'edu/course/:id/slug', to: 'education#course', as: :learn_course
...
# I also have admin-only resource-oriented controllers for managing
# the content, but that's separate.
namespace :admin do
resource :topic
resource :course
...
end
# ../some_view.html.erb
# Generate URLS like this:
<%= link_to topic.name, learn_topic_path(topic) %>
<%= link_to course.name, learn_course_path(course) %>
What I don't want:
Messing with to_param. That's a dirty hack and completely breaks separation of concerns.
Resource/RESTful routing. There are no CRUD operations here other than "read."
link_to 'text', course_path(id: course.id, slug: course.slug). This completely defeats the purpose of not requiring views to know what params are required to generate a URL for a course.
EDIT: I know FriendlyId exists, but I'm precisely trying to understand how this sort of thing can be done and what the mechanics are, so that's not a solution for now.
There has to be a way to tell the named route helper topic_path(topic) to take the required parameters in the route (e.g, :slug, :id, whatever else) from the topic model object.
Anybody know? Thanks!
The best I've been able to come up with: just override the *_path helpers with my own implementation.
If you know a way to make the default helpers work, please chime in!
This problem boils down to one issue: the auto-generated *_path and *_url helpers don't give me the flexibility I want. What I want them to do is trivial, so without another option, I can just write my own:
module ApplicationHelper
def learn_topic_path(topic)
"/edu/#{topic.slug}"
end
...
end
Writing a few _path/_url helper overrides avoids all kinds of complication, and allows you to keep out of to_param, avoid including new plugins, etc.
One could probably go another step forward and generate the static components of the route from known routing rules, as well as infer what attributes one needed to extract from a model if the dynamic segment names line up to the model attribute names, but that starts to break down once you do more complicated things or add multiple models (e.g., 'edu/:topic_slug/:course_slug').
The big downside to doing this is that you now have to update routes in two places every time you change them: the route definition itself in routes.rb as well as the corresponding route helper in application_helper.rb. I can live with that for now.
You can use FriendlyId gem to achieve that.
Here's the link:
https://github.com/norman/friendly_id/blob/master/README.md
Let me know if you have questions.
Related
I have a method on a model called Photo. I have it finding a selection of things from elsewhere in my app. All I need it to do at the end is to create a string of links that I can then output later on when the method is called on an instance.
My code is:
cars.map { |c| link_to(c.name, c) }.join(" AND ")
But i'm hitting this error:
undefined method `link_to' for #<Photo
Any ideas how to fix this?
link_to is a view helper which means it's only available in Rails views by default because it's a router / request concern.
If you specifically want to use link_to you have to include it or reference it directly.
See this SO answer
include ActionView::Helpers::UrlHelper
...
cars.map { |c| link_to(c.name, c) }.join(" AND ")
There are other ways of getting paths than using link_to that I would recommend you consider:
It's arguable that the Rails team would tell you to use UrlFor as the tip in that link suggests:
Tip: If you need to generate URLs from your models or some other place, then ActionController::UrlFor is what you're looking for. Read on for an introduction. In general, this module should not be included on its own, as it is usually included by url_helpers (as in Rails.application.routes.url_helpers).
UrlFor also allows one to access methods that have been auto-generated from named routes.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
include Rails.application.routes.url_helpers
def base_uri
# named_route method that uses UrlFor
user_path(self)
end
end
User.find(1).base_uri # => "/users/1"
create your own concern to bring in route helpers via ActionMailer as this article suggests
As you may see if you scroll through other SO questions about including view helpers in models, there is pushback on using router and request -based methods outside of controllers and views because it violates the principles of MVC.
I think your use case can give you some peace of mind about this, but it's worth knowing the water is murky and some people may advise you otherwise.
The traditional Rails wisdom (and what I'm about to give you here) is that models should not be creating HTML. They also shouldn't have methods that return HTML. Creating HTML <a> tags should be done much closer to the user interface: in a view template or maybe in a view helper. One reason is that the particular way the hyperlink should be generated is a concern of the view. (Does it need a nofollow attribute? class attributes? This will change, even from one view to another.) And the model should not have any knowledge of these details.
When you do generate links in the views, then you have access to all the helpers such as link_to.
Instead, as I understand it, a model should be responsible for returning its own data. Maybe in your case that'd be an array of dicts of :label, :url. I.e., pure data that'd be easy to pass to link_to.
Hope that helps!
I want to have a link at the bottom of my show.html.erb that links to the new action in a different controller.
class Sample < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :song
end
class Song < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :samples
end
So, at the bottom of the show action for songs, I want to link to new for samples. This seems pretty easy, but I'm struggling to figure this out. I would also like to pass the id from the song to the form as :song_id
Fiddy, because you're new, let me explain how this works...
Routes
Your problem is that you don't understand the Rails routing structure - I'll hopefully explain it for you.
Rails, since it's an MVC framework, builds a series of "routes" for you. These "routes" are stored in the file available at config/routes.rb.
Routes, as described by the Rails documentation are as follows:
The Rails router recognizes URLs and dispatches them to a controller's
action. It can also generate paths and URLs, avoiding the need to
hardcode strings in your views.
The most important thing you should consider here is the way the routes generate paths for you. These paths are simply Rails "helper" methods, which you can call from your views. The reason these exist is two-fold -
They provide you with a DRY (don't repeat yourself) way of accessing / manipulating data
They are constructed around objects, helping maintain the object-orientated nature of Rails
These will likely mean nothing to you. However, what you need to realize that if set up your routes correctly, it seriously helps your app's infrastructure immensely.
--
Rails
This leads us quite nicely onto appreciating the way in which Rails works
Rails is an MVC (model view controller) framework. This might seem somewhat trivial, but in reality, it's one of the most important aspects to learn about Rails development, and here's why:
The Rails software system works by taking "requests" (user input) and then routing them to specific controller#actions. Those controllers then build model data from the database, and will translate that into either variables or objects, which you can use in your view.
The reason I mention this is that this type of development takes a lot of getting used-to, in that your program's flow is not about logic / functionality, but the accessibility of data. Therefore, when you ask about the routes or other parts of your app, you need to firstly remember what data you wish to show, and also how you want that data to be shown - this will give you the ability to construct & use the routes / controller actions which will get it to work properly
--
Fix
In terms of what you're saying, the way you'd go about achieving the result you want will be to use a nested route:
#config/routes.rb
resources :songs do
resources :samples #-> domain.com/songs/:song_id/samples/new
end
This will create a new route for you (which you can check by firing rake routes in your rails c (console). This will give you a path to use for your samples#new action:
#app/views/songs/show.html.erb
<%= link_to #song.name, new_song_sample_path(#song) %>
The above link will take you to the samples#show action, which you'll be able to populate with as much data as you require from the samples controller. The important thing to note is this action will have params[:song_id] available for you to either build an object from, or otherwise
<%= link_to "New Sample", new_sample_path(:song_id => #song_id) %>
Where #song_id is the variable that has that id in it.
Set paths in link_to tag which you can get by running rake_routes in terminal.
Ex
link_to "New song", new_sample_path(#song)
In the example given above #song is the instance variable of your current page.
You can also get some idea from here:
link_to Base URL Randomly Changed
Song Model:
accepts_nested_attributes_for :sample, allow_destroy: true
Route:
resources :songs do
resources :samples
end
Song's Show file:
<%= link_to "New Sample", new_song_sample_path(#song) %>
in url it will be:
/songs/:song_id/sample/new
Try this and let me know it works or not... I hope this helps you
given this route
match 'posts/hello/:name/:title' => 'post#show', :as => :hello
what are the ways that I can call hello_path ?
if i call hello_path(#post), what does it try to do?
I was hoping that the :name and :title files will bind to the path automatically but it seems that rails only know how to get the :id out of the model object.
instead, it only works if I call it like
<%= link_to "link2", hello_url(:name=> #post.name, :title=>#post.title) %>
(lack of proper documentation is really killing me)
To answer your two questions:
At the command line, runrake routes to see what routes there are in
your app. It will show you all the ways you can use the named routes,
just add "_path" or "_url" to the name of the route which is shown on
the left.
Calling hello_path(#post) will generate a URL to the
show page for that hello instance.
The way you are calling it is the norm:
<%= link_to "link2", hello_url(:name=> #post.name, :title=>#post.title) %>
However, this may work too:
<%= link_to "link2", hello_url(#post.name, #post.title) %>
Here is some documentation (other than the Rails API) which should help.
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html
To answer your question of "what does hello_path try to do?"
hello_path knows how many parameters it's supposed to get. This is from counting the named parameters in config/routes. It will accept either a hash or a list of arguments. If you give it a hash, the keys must match the names of the URL parameters. If you give it a list of arguments, it'll just match them up by position - the first argument with the first named parameter.
Then, it will call to_param on each parameter individually before joining them all together (see code here, 4.0 branch).
If you pass in an object when it's expecting 2 or more params, it won't even get around to calling to_param on the object. That's when you get errors with no stack trace that say something like
No route matches {:controller=>"posts", :action=>"show", :id=>#<Post ...>}
Working with 1 named parameter
If you've only got one named parameter, things are pretty straightforward. If you need to look up your posts by name instead of id, you can just redefine to_param
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
...
def to_param
name
end
end
Working with multiple named parameters
But if the URL has more than one named parameter in it, then redefining to_param isn't enough. Let's say you tried this:
# app/models/post.rb
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
...
def to_param
{name: name, title: title}
end
end
# app/views/posts/index.html.erb
<%= post_path(post) %>
In this case, you'll get a routing error because you're not passing in enough arguments to post_path (see above). To get around this, I just call to_param explicitly:
# app/views/posts/index.html.erb
<%= post_path(post.to_param) %>
This is a little less slick than most Rails routing magic, but works perfectly well. If you later change the way you're looking up Posts, all you have to do is redefine to_param. No need to worry about all the places you've called post_path
Under the hood
The relevant code to look at is actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/routing
The other answers (at the time of this writing) are fine, but your reply to GregT's answer shows a lack of understand about Rails, which is fine -- we've all been there.
Specifically, three of the key principles behind Rails: convention over configuration, the model-view-controller architecture (MVC), and REST. It's stuff at the beginning of every beginning Rails book. Beginners often think they can just jump to the first chapter with code, but Rails differs from many other topics in that the first chapters explain important concepts and aren't just intro chapter filler. Because Rails isn't "code", it's a "framework of code".
"Convention over configuration" means if you follow certain conventions then you benefit from behaviors baked into Rails. Routing is one of those areas, if not the biggest, where convention benefits the developer although it is entirely configurable.
Paths following a specific routing format, are parsed into the controller, action and possibly an id, format, and additional parameters. By default and at minimum, a Rails (and also a Sinatra) path takes the following format and order:
/controller_name/action_name
It's a little more complicated than that, with more options, and it looks more like this in actuality:
/controller_name/action_name/(id)(.format)(?param=value)(&...)
...but it's more detail than is necessary for this answer.
The controller is the C in MVC, or the class that handles the request. The action is one of the seven RESTful actions (index, show, new, create, edit, update, and destroy) within that controller. Not all actions require an id (index, new and create) and not all of them are get requests (requests that generate a view, for instance destroy, create and update don't have views).
Putting it all together we see this example:
/articles/edit/1
...will route the request to the 'edit' action in the ArticlesController controller passing along id 1. It's expected that the controller will do some housekeeping, like authentication and authorization, then retrieve Article model (MCV) with ID 1 and pass it along to the "edit" view (MCV).
It's best, especially for new Rails developers, to stick to these conventions and perhaps add a few additional actions beyond those provided by REST.
You can step outside this convention by configuring in your routes.rb file an alternative routing scheme, not following REST, etc., but you'll be like a salmon swimming upstream -- it's a lot harder than going with the flow. If you go down that path (pun) you'll make a lot of additional work for yourself, probably reinvent the wheel somewhat, and lose advantages provided by the Rails framework. If you find yourself in that situation for whatever reason, perhaps Rails isn't the right tool for your job.
You can also call it like this
hello_path(#post.name, #post.title)
Hope it helps.
I have the following route:
get "/:user_name/things/:thing_name" => "things#show", :as => "show_user_thing"
Thing belongs to user. So with just an instance of thing I have both parameters. However, when using the route helpers, I'm forced to specify each segment separately like so:
show_user_thing_path(#thing.user, #thing)
This sucks. I'd much rather do just this:
show_user_thing_path(#thing)
But how do I do this the 'route helper way'? I'd love to still use all the rails goodies for route's like these. Any ideas?
I feel your pain. In the cases where I uses the url helper a lot, I just write my own helper.
def show_thing_by_user_path(thing)
show_user_thing_path(thing.user, thing)
end
Of course you'd have to modify it slightly to include any options and formatting, but I think you get the idea of what I'm saying.
I'd like to have a URL like this:
/payroll/region/1
and I'd like it to map to the Tasks Controller's payroll_list function. I'd also like to use REST. What's the best way to do this?
Many thanks!
Well I'd suggest you better go with the convention how Rails handles this. If you still insist on using such "strange" URLs and want to ignore the problems/headaches this can create during further development, then try to use Refraction.
I don't want to be rude but currently it seems to me that you did not understand why restful URLs are the way they are. Please do understand the design behind this first, then rethink your application/controller and routing design. I bet you will be enlighted.
In this example, your URL should probably be /regions/1/payrolls with map.resources :regions, :has_many => :payrolls. Then your payroll list would be rendered by the PayrollsController having a params[:region_id] - and that actually makes sense (and probably what you tried to achieve with your URL layout). Code snippet:
def index
if params[:region_id]
#region = Region.find(params[:region_id])
#payrolls = #region.payrolls
else
#payrolls = Payroll.all
end
end
If you still want to have a resource under a different named URL, use the following:
map.resources :regions do |regions|
regions.resources :tasks, :as => :payrolls
end
This will map the nested resources to the tasks controller using the named URL part "payrolls." But this probably does not work as you might expect because restful logic means you should handle the payroll model in the PayrollsController. Otherwise you might run into strange looking code. Maybe your design of the TasksController is just wrong? Rails will probably expect tasks to be handled over to your tasks controller although you name it payrolls. This can be confusing at least (however, it does not actually expect these being task models, so it will probably work).
BTW - Keep in mind: "restful" also means your application should answer to standard verbs on a resource, not just using "resourceful" routes. It's also about the GET, PUT, DELETE and POST http verbs, and of course the "edit", "new" etc default actions. Do not try to make your controllers big and complicated. Follow the motto "skinny controllers - fat models".
OK, so a better question, then might be this:
How can I get it so that I use your suggestion:
/regions/1/payroll
and have that map RESTfully to:
Tasks controller with index, new, etc that are prefixed by "payroll_"?
Like this: TasksController#payroll_index or TasksController#payroll_new