I noticed that
namespace :admin do
namespace :manage do
get 'list'
end
end
Actually successfully calls following action (for /admin/manage/list):
class Admin::ManageController
def list
render :text => 'success'
end
end
Which is kind of intuitive (that's why i tried it), but it's not covered anywhere in http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html
Can someone tell for sure that it's standard expected functionality that won't stop working after next version or something?
It is not unexpected and is designed to work like that. However, a more typical way of doing it would be
namespace :admin do
resources :manage do
collection do
get 'list'
end
end
end
The main difference between namespace and resources is that the latter, by default, provides the standard routes for CRUD actions. Both of them route to Admin::ManageController.
They have similar options as well. See the docs for namespace and resources
If Manage is a resource that can be created and destroyed in your app, it makes more sense to use resources. If it is just an identifier to separate routes for certain actions then use namespace.
Related
I'm working on a simple reservation application. Here are my routes
resources :users do
get 'reservations', on: :member
end
resources :listings do
resources :reservations
end
When I try to make a reservation, action reservations#new takes me to reservations_path . Of course I'm getting error as this path doesn't exist. I'd like action new to take me to listing_reservations_path instead. I was hopping it will be done automatically since resources :reservations is in nested resources. I read about routes and tried many things but can't find any working way of doing it. Is it possible?
You seem to be unclear on the nature of routes. The action reservations#new exists independently from any route. A route is just a way to map a URL path to a controller and action. If you are trying to do something like:
redirect_to controller: :resources, action: :new
You will have trouble, as all of your routes require some context. Instead, you need to provide whatever the URL helper you're using with a context:
redirect_to listing_reservations_path(#listing)
link_to "New Reservation", new_listing_reservation_path(#listing)
link_to "Reservation", [#listing, #reservation]
I am writing a basic application that scrapes data. I have the following in my routes.rb.
Rails.application.routes.draw do
constraints subdomain: 'api' do
namespace :api, path: '/' do
resources :apps, :only => :show
end
end
In controllers I have something like this although I am not sure how are resources connected to Controller.
class AppsController < ApplicationController
def show
puts "this works"
respond_to do |format|
format.json { render json: #user }
end
end
def apps
puts "my app"
end
end
Also, I dont have a Model. Does that mean that in my resources :apps calls a method in AppsController called apps?
If I wanted it t call apps then how's it possible ?
how does a controller in rails know what route does it belong to
I am trying to add a GET /apps?filter=5 that returns my scraped data in the form of JSON and with filter as parameter to that it means that return 5 JSON objects to me
#config/routes.rb
constraints subdomain: 'api' do
namespace :api, path: '/' do
get :apps, to: "apps#apps", on: :collection #-> api.url.com/apps
end
end
A much more coherent way to do it would be...
#config/routes.rb
constraints subdomain: 'api' do
namespace :api, path: '/' do
resources :apps #-> api.url.com/apps -> apps#index
end
end
I think you're getting confused with how Rails works, especially with your data.
I post this all the time, maybe it will help you:
As you can see, your request is not tied to a specific "model", nor is a controller bound to it either. I'll explain the importance of the MVC (Model View Controller) aspect of rails in a minute.
Your thought process is that each request / resource has to have a corresponding model / dataset to pull from. Strictly, this is not the case, although many would believe it to be.
Remember that Rails is just an application framework - it has to work with all the same protocols & restrictions as the other frameworks & languages out there.
When you send a request to Rails (through your browser URL), it takes that request, and matches it to the appropriate controller. This controller action will then pull data from your model (if you've set it up like that), render the view with that data, and return the processed HTML to the browser.
Thus, you don't have to have a model bound to a particular controller action, or anything. You just need to make sure your controllers & views are mapped accordingly.
OOP
I think the part you're getting hooked up on is the object orientated nature of Ruby / Rails.
Although every part of the Rails framework is meant to work with objects, this only applies on a request-basis.
For example, whilst it's typically recommended to keep your controllers resourceful, you don't have to adhere to that methodology if you don't want to. Many newbies don't know the difference.
Thus, when you use the following:
#config/routes.rb
constraints subdomain: 'api' do
namespace :api, path: '/' do
resources :apps, only: :show #-> api.url.com/:id -> apps#show
end
end
... what you're denoting is a controller bound by its resourceful nature. This would typically be expected to use model data, but it's not essential...
In controllers I have something like this although I am not sure how
are resources connected to Controller.
Rails.application.routes.draw provides a DSL which hooks into Rack (the interface between the HTTP server and Rails). It generates rules for where to route the response from Rack.
The DSL is provides has a lot of ways to do the same things. In this example, the resources :apps, :only => :show line basically says you want to generate all of the REST verbs for the AppsController, but you only want the :show verb, so the router will only generate a route to AppsController#show. Note that you can run rake routes to get a list of your routes.
Also, I dont have a Model. Does that mean that in my resources :apps
calls a method in AppsController called apps? If I wanted it t call
apps then how's it possible ?
Models are totally separate abstractions. Once the code reaches your controller you are in plain Ruby land until you return out of that controller action. Models are simply plain Ruby objects with the ability to talk to the database.
In your code if you wanted to call apps from the show method (or action) then you can just call it from there since it's in the same scope.
how does a controller in rails know that ok that is my route. In this case, apps
I'm not sure I understand this question, could you elaborate?
I am trying to add a GET /apps?filter=5 that returns my scraped data in the form of JSON and with filter as parameter to that it means
that return 5 JSON objects to me
For one, you'll need to add a route for /apps. There are several ways you can do this. Here's one approach. I'm going to call it index instead of apps since that's more conventional:
# config/routes.rb
get '/apps' => 'apps#index'
# app/controllers/apps_controller.rb
class AppsController < ApplicationController
respond_to :json
def index
limit = params[:filter].to_i
#users = User.first(limit) # Implement this however you wish
respond_with(#users)
end
end
My syntax might be a little off here with the respond_to and respond_with, but it should explain how the controller routes
Routing simply maps URLs to a controller/action, the existence of a model with the same name does not matter.
To get to the apps action that you defined in the AppsController you need to define a route that maps to apps#apps < This syntax means AppsController, apps action.
An example of a route that would map to the AppsController apps action:
get '/apps', to: "apps#apps"
This is a weird example. It's not conventional to have a def apps action inside AppsController, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with this action?
If you want a rest call to /apps that returns a JSON list of apps, then this all you need to do.
router
resources :apps, only: [:index]
controller
class AppsController < ActionController::Base
def index
puts "This is the index route in AppsController"
end
end
In the router, when you specify resource :apps, only: [:index]. This routes the request GET /apps to AppsController#index
I have the following routes.rb:
resources :users
namespace :vmt do
resources :dashboards do
resources :users
resources :evaluation_units
resources :orga_units
end
end
I want to set the user in an overall context and nested in a single dashboard context within a namespace. The users-Controller is not in the namespace. So when I open the path /vmt/dashboards/1/users in browser, I get the following Routing Error
uninitialized constant Vmt::UsersController
So how can I specify, that in this resource
namespace :vmt do
resources :dashboards do
resources :users
that the controller is not in a namespace? I tried to set the controller explecitly with
resources :users, controller: 'user'
but it's still in the vmt namespace.
Using scopes will point rails to the proper url, but does not seem to provide the same useful route url helpers. We can, however, use / to point to the 'top level' controller.
Say you have two routes we want to display the users on:
/users and /admin/users
resources: users
namespace :admin do
resources :users, controller: '/users' # 'users' alone would look for a '/admin/users_controller'
end
With this, we can continue to use the url helper admin_users_path
(Note: Not a rails expert, there may be a way to create url helpers for scopes, or some other solution. Above tested on rails 5.2)
My original answer didn't work in the end, once you're inside a namespaced scope within a route you can't get out anymore.
The easiest way to re-use your logic is to create a Vmt::UsersController like so:
class Vmt::UsersController < ::UsersController
end
You can specify a different module with the module key.
For example:
resources :users, module: nil
Edit: I'm not 100% sure if this will work inside a namespace. If not, you can change it to a scope, and add the module explicitly to the other resources.
I'm new with RoR so this is a newbie question:
if I have a controller users_controller.rb and I add a method foo, shouldn't it create this route?
http://www.localhost:3000/users/foo
because when I did that, I got this error:
Couldn't find User with id=foo
I of course added a view foo.html.erb
EDIT:
I added to routes.rb this code but I get the same error:
resources :users do
get "signup"
end
This doesn't work automatically in rails 3. You'll need to add
resource :users do
get "foo"
end
to your routes.rb
You'll definitely want to have a look at http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html, it explains routing pretty well.
Rails is directing you to the show controller and thinks that you're providing foo as :id param to the show action.
You need to set a route that will be dispatched prior to being matched as /users/:id in users#show
You can accomplish this by modifying config/routes.rb by adding the following to replace your existing resource describing :users
resource :users do
get "foo"
end
Just to add to the other answers, in earlier versions of Rails there used to be a default route
match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)'
which gave the behaviour you describe where a request of the form controller/action would call the given method on the given controller. This line is still in routes.rb but is commented out by default. You can uncomment it to enable this behaviour but the comment above it explains why this is not recommended:
# This is a legacy wild controller route that's not recommended for RESTful applications.
# Note: This route will make all actions in every controller accessible via GET requests.
At the schema ':controller/:action(.:format)', you can also easily do the following
resources :users do
get "foo", on: :collection
end
or
resources :users do
collection do
get 'foo'
end
end
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html#adding-collection-routes
i have a simple cms on ROR 3.2.
with this folder scheme:
app |controllers |my controllers
but i wanted to have an "admin" section where i could have some controllers too.
so i created
rails generate controller admin/Users
app | controllers |admin & my admin controllers
so my file is:
users_controller.rb
class Admin::UsersController < ApplicationController
def index
render(:text => "sou o index!")
end
def list
render(:text => "sou o list")
end
end
On my routes i have:
namespace :admin do
resources :users
end
match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)'
Im new to rails and i cant figure out the solution. Cant find it anywhere.
The PROBLEM is
i try do acess:
http://localhost:3000/admin/users/list
and i get this error:
Unknown action The action 'show' could not be found for
Admin::UsersController
You seem to not have an understanding of how Rails's RESTful routing works by default. I recommend reading the Resource Routing section of the Rails Guides. By default, when using resources in your routes, the show action is what is used to display a particular model record. You can customize this behavior to an extent in that you can change the URL that for the show action, but not the method name in the model:
resources :users, :path_names => { :new => 'list' }
If you are going to use RESTful routing (which you should), you should remove the default route (match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)'). Also, you can run rake routes at any time from the terminal to see details about your current routing configuration.
Your on the right track, however, there are a few more steps involved to complete your solution for a backend admin CRUD section. Check out the following example of how to create it yourself:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/15615003/2207480