I have an account/settings page people can visit to update their account. It's a singular resource, so they can (or should) only be able to update their own account settings. I'm running into a weird URL format when there are form errors displayed.
If they are on /account/settings/edit and try to submit the form with errors (not a valid email address, for example) they are redirected to /account/settings.1 where it shows them what went wrong (in our example, not a valid email address).
Everything "works" but I was wondering why there is a .1 being appended to the URL. I figured they would be sent back to account/settings or account/settings/edit where they can correct the error. Am I doing something wrong?
routes.rb
namespace :account do
resource :settings, :only => [:show, :edit, :update]
end
settings_controller.rb
def edit
#account = Account.find(session[:account][:id])
end
def update
#account = Account.find(session[:account][:id])
if #account.update_attributes(params[:account])
redirect_to account_settings_path
else
render 'edit'
end
end
rake routes
edit_account_settings GET /account/settings/edit(.:format) account/settings#edit
account_settings GET /account/settings(.:format) account/settings#show
account_settings PUT /account/settings(.:format) account/settings#update
Make sure you generate your paths using edit_account_settings_path, NOT edit_account_settings_path(#user). For singular resources you shouldn't pass in a resource, because, as you say, there is only one of them.
Related
I'm trying to build a link shortener. The intended behavior is that on the first page (new) the user inserts his long link and presses a button, then he gets redirected to an another page called result, where a preset message will be waiting for him, along with both his short and long link.
I'm struggling with controllers, however, as no matter what I do something always comes wrong. Right now my controller looks like this:
class UrlsController < ApplicationController
def new
#short_url = Url.new
end
def create
#short_url = Url.new(url_params)
if #short_url.save
flash[:short_id] = #short_url.id
redirect_to "/urls/result"
else
render action: "new"
end
end
def show
Url.find(params[:id])
##short_url_yield =
redirect_to #short_url.url
end
def result
end
private
def url_params
params.require(:url).permit(:url)
end
end
And the routes.rb:
Rails.application.routes.draw do
resources :urls, :only => [:show, :new, :create, :result]
get 'urls/result' => 'urls#result'
root to: redirect('/urls/new')
end
When I submit the link, however, rails returns the following error:
Couldn't find Url with 'id'=result
Extracted source (around line #17):
def show
Url.find(params[:id])
##short_url_yield =
redirect_to #short_url.url
end
It seems I don't understand the logic behind it. What's going wrong? Isn't the show bit supposed to be a redirect that happens when I click the shortified link?
Rails routes have priority in the order they are defined. Since your SHOW route declaration is before get 'urls/result' => 'urls#result' the url gets matched as /urls/id=result.
Simply move your custom route above the resources block or use a collection block.
resources :urls, :only => [:show, :new, :create, :result] do
collection do
get 'result'
end
end
Using the collection and member blocks tells Rails to give priority to the routes inside over the normal CRUD actions such as show.
I've read everything I can find, and I'm still stumped.
I'm trying to use a before_filter to catch users who are not logged in, and send them to an alternative index page. The idea is that users who are logged in will see a listing of their own articles when they hit index.html.erb, users who are not logged in will be redirect to a showall.html.erb page that lists the articles but does not let them read them (and hits them with some ads).
I added a route:
resources :articles do
get "showall"
resources :comments
end
'Rake routes' shows a route article_showall. I have a partial _showall.html.erb in the views/articles folder (it only contains the text 'showall is working!'). If I render showall in another view (<%= render "showall" %>), it works fine.
This is the applicable part of my controller:
class ArticlesController < ApplicationController
skip_before_action :authorize, only: [:index, :show, :showall]
before_filter :require_user, :only => [:index]
def require_user
unless User.find_by(id: session[:user_id])
render 'showall', :notice => "Please log in to read articles."
end
end
def index
#articles = current_user.articles
end
def showall
#articles = Article.all
end
When I run it (while not logged in), it get the following error:
Missing template articles/showall, application/showall with....etc
I'm stumped. Why can I render 'showall' in a view, but I get Missing Template error when I refer to it in my controller? Thank you in advance for any help!
David and user4703663 are right. Your problem is that you named the template to be a partial but are rendering it as a template. You could either remove the underscore from the file name and leave your code as it is, or leave the filename as it is and "render partial: 'showall'" from your index view.
edit: I should add that the missing template error should not instill dread in your heart. It's guiding you to your mistake, directly. Don't stress it and just try to remember what it meant next time. It's almost always a typo, or loading a partial but naming it as a template or vice versa, or forgetting a subfolder for a relative path or something like that. It's normal, and the interpreter spits those errors to help you, not to oppress you. 😄
Replace
render 'showall', :notice => "Please log in to read articles."
with
render :file => '/partial/showall', :notice => "Please log in to read articles."
Great, fixed that problem, and now it spits back
undefined method `each' for nil:NilClass
even though the 'showall' is nearly identical to 'index'.
SIGH
I am making a login route and added this to the routes.rb resources :sign_in
I made a controller like this:
class Mobile::Sign_inController < ApplicationController
layout "mobile/application"
def get
respond_to do |format|
format.html
end
end
def index
respond_to do |format|
format.html
end
end
end
and it seems to get routed correctly, but my view file which is located here:
/app/views/mobile/sign_in.html.haml
which just has 1 line for test purposes:
%strong{:class => "code", :id => "message"} Hello Signin!
But when I go to the url: http://m.cmply.local:8800/signin in the browser, the screen is totally white with nothing rendered in the browser.
Any idea why this happens and how to fix it?
Thanks!
A few problems here:
Your controller name should be SignInsController, not Sign_inController. Consider changing your name to UserSessionsController or similar, since that better reflects the resource it represents. You can still specify an alternate name for the URL (such as sign_in).
Why is your controller namespaced under Mobile? Your routes given don't reflect that, but you don't seem to have provided them all. The route should probably be under a scope:
scope :module => "mobile" do
resource :sign_in
end
Since there is only "one" sign in, it should have its route declared resource :sign_in, and probably even resource :sign_in, :only => [:new, :create, :destroy], depending on what you want. This means that the index action no longer exists, and you probably want to replace it with the new action`.
There is no get action by default for RESTful resources, I'm not sure what you meant it to be, but it should be something else.
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.
I'd like to create a rails route for editing a user's profile.
Instead of having to use /users/:id/edit, I'd like to have a url like /edit_profile
Is it possible to create a dynamic route that turns /edit_profile into /users/{user's id}/edit, or should I do thing in a controller or?
You might want to create a separate controller for this task but you could also continue using users_controller and just check whether there is a params[:id] set:
def edit
if params[:id]
#user = User.find(params[:id])
else
#user = current_user
end
end
But you should note that /users normally routes to the index action and not show if you still have the map.resources :users route. But you could set up a differently called singular route for that:
map.resources :users
map.resource :profile, :controller => "users"
This way /users would list all the users, /users/:id would show any user and /profile would show the show the currently logged in users page. To edit you own profile you would call '/profile/edit'.
Since a route and controller serve two different purposes, you will need both.
For the controller, assuming you're storing the user id in a session, you could just have your edit method do something like:
def edit
#user = User.find(session[:user_id])
end
Then have a route that looks something like:
map.edit_profile "edit_profile", :controller => "users", :action => "edit"
This route would give you a named route called edit_profile_path
Tomas Markauskas's answer could work, but here's the answer to your question from the Rails Guide:
get 'edit_profile', to: 'users#edit'
So, when someone goes to www.yoursite.com/edit_profile, it will route to www.yoursite.com/users/edit.
Then, in your controller you can access the user with
#user = User.find(session[:current_user_id])
Assuming you set that session variable when someone logs in. Also, don't forget to check if they're logged in. This will work if your using Resourceful Routing (the Rails default) or not.
Source: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html
make the route as
get '/users/:id/edit', to: 'users#edit', as: 'edit_profile'
As explained in this link section 'The hard way' :
http://augustl.com/blog/2009/styling_rails_urls/
The url will be
/users/edit_profile
Because the ID is no longer in the URL, we have to change the code a bit.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
before_create :create_slug
def to_param
slug
end
def create_slug
self.slug = self.title.parameterize
end
end
When a user is created, the URL friendly version of the title is stored in the database, in the slug column.
For better understanding read the link below
http://blog.teamtreehouse.com/creating-vanity-urls-in-rails
write it in any home controler.
def set_roots
if current_user
redirect_to dashboard_home_index_path
else
redirect_to home_index_path
end
end
in routes.rb file
root :to => 'home#set_roots'
match "/find_roots" => "home#set_roots"