I have a TextsController, each Text can be of a different (fixed) type.
Let's say I have a "book" type. I want to create a resource route to show a text, and I want the route to look like this:
/book/my-book
Another type, "manual" for instance, should lead to using the following URL:
/manual/rtfm
Well, I have RTFM and I can't get it to work the way I thought it should work.
Here's what I've tried:
scope '/:text_type' do
resources :texts, only: :show
end
rake routes shows me the following route spec:
text GET /:text_type/texts/:id(.:format) texts#show
I don't get why the static 'texts' segment should be there?
So I tried including an empty path option:
scope '/:text_type', path: '' do
resources :texts, only: :show
end
Which doesn't change anything, I guess because (from source) my first argument to scope actually overrides any value given to path.
The only route setup that got me what I'm looking for is this:
scope '/:text_type' do
resources :texts, only: :show, path: ''
end
It seems to completely defeat the purpose of scope which is to "[scope] a set of routes to the given default options".
Why wouldn't any of the previous forms actually override path for my resources call?
Looks like a bug to me?
So should I file a bug report, or will you hit me hard on the head with the f* manual? ^^
First of all the scoping thing. Routes with scope are for namespacing routes, as you would do for admin areas. So the mentioned routes are generated correctly and there is no bug (and no bug report needed). You can read more details about namespacing at Controller Namespaces and Routing.
You could slug the parameters yourself by following 'Creating Vanity URLs in Rails'
or use the friendly_id gem like the Railscast advises.
Though I would stick to ids as long as I could for several reasons.
Related
Is it possible to send multiple paths to the same resource in Rails?
Example: route both '/foo-bars' and '/foo_bars' to resource :foo_bars
Maybe you'd prefer a permanent redirect instead? Browsers will cache it and possibly less maintenance problems you'll have later on (1 path = 1 resource is something rails programmers typically take for granted)
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html#redirection
get '/stories/:name', to: redirect('/articles/%{name}')
This may work:
resources :foo_bars
resources :foo_bars, path: "foo-bars", as: "foo-bars"
The as will also alias your path/url helpers, omitting it requires you to use one set of helpers (the originally defined ones).
resources :foo_bars, :foo-bars, controller: :foo_bars do
# nested
end
This (not tested) should give you multiple sets of routes pointing to the same controller.
I have to modify the routes file in order to have SEO improvement.
This is my context, a rails backend generate a JSON feed with the route's name in, I have to read it and change the default name.
For example, I have this:
get '/people' => 'people#show', as: :people
and I'd like to change /people in some value read from my JSON feed.
I created a class to get the JSON object in my app
class JSONDatabase
def initialize(kind_of_site)
#kind_of_site = kind_of_site
end
def fetch_database_remote(url)
JSON.parse(open(url).read)
end
end
but how can i access it in routes file?
Thank you
You don't necessarily need to modify your application's routes. What you can do is define a wild card route that leads to a unique controller where you read the updated route. This approach is kind of hackish but gives you the unlimited routes you need without modifying the routes.
Your config/routes.rb file would look something like this:
resources :defined_models
root to: 'controller#action'
# At last we define the wildcard route
get '/:route' => 'routing_controller#routing_action'
Then, at this routing action we can do the job of seeing if this route (now defined in the params[:route] variable) corresponds to the modified one. Just remember to redirect to a 404 if the route given is not defined, since with this approach you loose the Rails default way of dealing with undefined routes.
I have the following routes in my config/routes.rb file:
resources :employees do
get 'dashboard'
get 'orientation'
end
employees refers to a regular resource handling the standard RESTful actions. dashboard and orientation are what I currently refer to "custom actions" which act on Employee instances. I apologize if I have my terminology mixed up and dashboard and orientation are really something else. These custom actions respond to URLs as follows:
http://myhost/employees/1/dashboard
i.e. They're "member" actions much like show, edit etc.
Anyway, this all works well enough. Regular actions such as show on EmployeesController obtain the ID of the associated Employee through params[:id]. However, with this current structure, dashboard and orientation have to use params[:employee_id] instead. This is not too difficult to deal with, but does lead to some additional code complexity as my regular before_filters which expect params[:id] don't work for these two actions.
How do I have the routing system populate params[:id] with the ID for these custom actions in the same way as show etc.? I've tried various approaches with member instead of get for these actions but haven't got anything to work the way I would like yet. This app is built using Ruby on Rails 3.2.
This might help you:
resources :employees do
member do
get 'dashboard'
get 'orientation'
end
end
and the above will generate routes like below, and then you will be able to use params[:id] in your EmployeesController.
dashboard_employee GET /employees/:id/dashboard(.:format) employees#dashboard
orientation_employee GET /employees/:id/orientation(.:format) employees#orientation
I haven't tested this example, but you can set the resourceful paths explicitly.
Something like this might work:
resources :employees, path: '/employees/:id' do
get 'dashboard', path: '/dashboard'
get 'orientation', path: '/orientation'
end
I have a community_users model that I route in the following way:
resources :communities do
resources :users
end
This creates the route /communities/:id/users/.
I'd like to configure this route so that only the name of the community with the corresponding :id is shown.
In other words, if a community has an id of '1' and the name 'rails-lovers' - the route would read:
/rails-lovers
and not:
/communities/1/users/
You might want to check out the gem friendly_id
That will give you the clean URLs you are looking for.
I'm not quite sure if this is what you're looking for, but:
One option would be to create the route
match ':community_name' => 'users#show_users_for_community'
and then in the UsersController have
def show_users_for_community
#community = Community.find_by_name(params[:community_name])
<do what you need to do here>
end
I'm not sure if that route will match too many URLs or not -- it's a very general route. So if you do this, maybe put it low down in your routes file.
I have a set of routes that are generated dynamically at runtime, but that all point to the same controller i.e.
map.resources :authors, :controller => 'main'
map.resources :books, :controller => 'main'
These all work fine, producing routes like /authors/1, /books, /books/55, etc and then all end up being processed by the 'main' controller.
However, I can't seem to find how to get the name of the resource in the controller i.e. in the index action when the URL is /authors or /books I'd like to be able to determine which resource it is, i.e. Author or Book
I cannot use separate controllers for this.
Is this at all possible ?
EDIT: complete change of answer because it was waaay off.
So because it changes the params that you see in your action you'll have to get at the actual uri. It is really just as simple as what Terry suggested.
def index
if request.request_uri =~ /books/
#...
else
# if it is a author
end
end
This compares the request uri (the part that would be after localhost:3000) to books and so you can see what the user has requested.
I don't think there's anything like a .resource method, but you could look at request.request_uri, which in your case would return things like /authors or /books, and could act accordingly.
See the "Defaults routes and default parameters" section of the ActionController::Routing documentation. You can program into your routes arbitrary extra parameters you would like sent to your controller.
Looking at the request URI will force you to keep routes and controllers in sync, which will make your code more fragile and less easily re-used. Avoid if you possibly can.