I am trying to assign a default value to a check box in ROR. The following is the heirachy:
Check if value is in the params (url querystring)
Check if it's in the session variable
If neither, default to all possible values and set #rates to all possible values
I have written the following code:
#all_rates = Rates.all_rates
rates_all = {}
#all_rates.each {|rate| rates_all[rate] = "1"}
p rates_all
#rates = params[:rates] ||= session[:rates] ||= rates_all
puts #rates.length, #rates
when i p rates_all, i get the hash back, however when i check #rates.length it is not being assigned i get a 0.
Did you check if params[:rates] is nil? Because if it's an empty hash then it's still an object, just without any values. But the empty hash object would be assigned to #rates anyway, resulting that rates is an empty hash object too, with length 0.
Give this a try:
#rates = case
when params[:rates].present?
params[:rates]
when session[:rates].present?
session[:rates]
else
Rates.all_rates.inject({}) { |hsh, rate| hsh.merge(rate => '1') }
end
Sidebar:
Your model name should be the singular Rate. The ||= syntax in your example is invalid. It should be just ||.
Related
I am making an application, part of whose code requires many if .. else conditions:
if #model_name == "Style"
if row.include? ('colors')
colors = row['colors'].split(';')
model.style_colors.concat Color.where('code IN (?)', colors).map {|i| i.id.to_s }
row.delete('colors')
end
if row.include? ('gender') and row.include? ('garments')
#garments = row['garments']
#gender = row['gender']
row.delete('garments')
row.delete('gender')
end
if row.include? ('sports')
#sports = row['sports']
row.delete('sports')
end
if row.include?('decoration_packages')
#decorations_packages = row['decoration_packages']
row.delete('decoration_packages')
end
model.attributes = row.to_hash.merge!(active: FALSE)
else
model.attributes = row.to_hash
end
I need to make objects of row hash to access subclasses, and then delete them from row so it can be saved to a model.
Any idea how I can minimize the use of conditions or optimize it?
There's a few optimisations here...
row.include? ('gender') and row.include? ('garments')
could be implemented as
['gender', 'garments'].all?{|x| row.include?(x)}
#garments = row['garments']
row.delete('garments')
could be implemented as
#garments = row.delete('garments')
You could actually squash a lot of these onto one line:
if row.include? ('sports')
#sports = row['sports']
row.delete('sports')
end
could be
#sports = row.delete('sports') if row.include? ('sports')
Also worth considering:
Do you need to delete the values from 'row'? Could you just retrieve the value?
What are you trying to do here? It looks like you're pulling a hash into instance variables... Which is what ActiveRecord does, basically. Could you just create a model with these attributes and then call it in this style?
Style.new(row)
if #model_name == "Style"
if row.include?('colors')
model.style_colors.concat(
Color.where(code: row.delete('colors').split(';')).pluck(:id).map(&:to_s)
)
end
if row.include?('gender') and row.include?('garments')
#garments = row.delete('garments')
#gender = row.delete('gender')
end
if row.include?('sports')
#sports = row.delete('sports')
end
if row.include?('decoration_packages')
#decorations_packages = row.delete('decoration_packages')
end
model.attributes = row.to_hash.merge!(active: false)
else
model.attributes = row.to_hash
end
I would do something like this with your current code:
if #model_name == "Style"
row_key_set = row.keys.to_set
if row.include? 'colors'
colors = row['colors'].split(';')
color_ids = Color.where(code: colors).pluck(:id)
model.style_colors.concat(color_ids.map(&:to_s))
end
if row_key_set >= Set['gender', 'garments']
#garments = row.delete('garments')
#gender = row.delete('gender')
end
#sports = row.delete('sports')
#decorations_packages = row.delete('decoration_packages')
model.attributes = row.to_hash.merge(active: false)
else
model.attributes = row.to_hash
end
Instead of using Color.where('code IN (?)', colors) you can just use Color.where(code: colors).
Instead of using .map {|i| i.id.to_s } you can use pluck (.pluck(:id)) to get an array of color ids. This also makes for a quicker query since only the ids get fetched from the database instead of the whole records.
I personally like to use sets to check if multiple values are present in another set. For this reason I create the row_key_set variable row.keys.to_set. Now you can easily check certain keys are present on your hash by just checking if the key set is greater or equal than another set (thus being a superset). row_key_set >= Set['gender', 'garments'] With just one check you could leave this out, but if you have multiple checks this might be worth the trouble. I also find code written this way also more readable, but that's just personal peference.
You don't need to check if a key is present on a Hash, the documentation tells us the following:
Deletes the key-value pair and returns the value from hsh whose key is equal to key. If the key is not found, it returns nil.
This means you can leave out the include? check and write the result from the delete directly to the instance variable. If the key is not present nil will be set for the instance variable.
Lastly I would leave out the explanation mark in row.to_hash.merge!(active: false). The version without explanation mark doesn't alter the original array and reduces the chance on accidental side effects. You're saving the variable to model.attributes anyway and toss away the generated array from the to_hash method. It's normally better to use non-altering versions of methods, unless you explicitly want a certain effect to happen.
I've got a problem with assigning some value to model attribute and save it. I've tried a lot of ways, but none worked.
#rating = Rating.new(rating_params)
#rating.save
#rating.update_attribute(:ip_address, request.remote_ip)
or
#rating = Rating.new(rating_params)
#rating.ip_address = request.remote_ip
#rating.save
Nothing is working for me :-( Everytime I got NULL in my database for column ip_address
Solution to debug in this situation.
#rating = Rating.new(rating_params)
#rating.ip_address = request.remote_ip
#check is't valid to save: true || false
#rating.valid?
# if false, print error messages
p #rating.errors
p #rating.errors.full_messages
#either way you can try save without validation.
#rating.save(:validate => false)
Also, What data type of column ip_address. You can't save integer into string or vice versa.
remote_ip by default string class, if want to save as integer.
Convert String Ip-address to Integer
Rails newbie here.
I have an integration with stripe where users can update the billing address on their card, however, stripe doesn't accept empty strings, only nil values, and it's possible that users won't need to fill in the second address line for example.
How would I go about iterating through params received from a form and convert empty strings into nil?
I have a Stripe Tool module that handles stripe related tasks.
In my controller i have:
def add_billing_address
account_id = current_user.account_id
account = Account.find_by(id: account_id)
stripe_id = account.stripe_customer_id
# convert params empty strings to nil here
StripeTool.add_billing_address(stripe_id: stripe_id,
stripe_token: params[:stripeToken],
address_line1: params[:address_line1],
address_line2: params[:address_line2],
address_city: params[:address_city],
address_state: params[:address_state],
address_zip: params[:address_zip]
)
# redirects and error handling happens after this
You can call .map .each on the params hash in the controller like this:
params.each do |key, value|
params[key] = nil if value === ''
end
But it's probably better to let your form return a nil value when a field contains no data.
I would recommend to avoid modifying the values in the params object, cause it is not good practice to change them in place. It is better to create a new object the has the values you want to use.
stripe_params = params.select { |_,v| v.present? }
This will create a new object without any of the blank attributes. I'm guessing that if an attribute is nil, you might as well not pass it at all.
I'm working on a method that will allow me to add in a "word" and its "definition", into a hash.
Here's what I have:
class Dictionary
def entries
#entries ||= {}
end
def add word, definition = nil
entries[word] = definition
"#{entries}"
end
end
Note: I want the definition parameter to be optional, hence my initialization to nil. However, for some reason that is showing up in my output.
Example: Passing in "fish" and "aquatic animal":
My output: {{"fish"=>"aquatic animal"}=>nil}
Desired output: {"fish"=>"aquatic animal"}
It seems like the problem is that it's putting both values that I pass to the method into the first key in the hash, and is putting that "nil" value into that key's value. Where am I making an error?
Edit: Adding the relevant RSpec block that is doing the method call so that I can better understand exactly how RSpec is making this call:
describe Dictionary do
before do
#d = Dictionary.new
end
it 'is empty when created' do
#d.entries.should == {}
end
it 'can add whole entries with keyword and definition' do
#d.add('fish' => 'aquatic animal')
#d.entries.should == {'fish' => 'aquatic animal'}
#d.keywords.should == ['fish']
end
Thanks!
If you want to optionally accept a hash entry...
def add word, definition = nil
if word.class == Hash
entries.merge!(word)
else
entries[word] = definition
end
"#{entries}"
end
You don't want to do
#d.add('fish' => 'aquatic animal')
You want to do...
#d.add('fish', 'aquatic animal')
As it is, you're passing a hash as the first argument, second argument is empty.
Your RSpec is wrong.
Change #d.add('fish' => 'aquatic animal') to #d.add('fish', 'aquatic animal')
Your #add method is accepting 2 parameters, with one being optional. With your current code, you're passing in a single hash 'fish' => 'aquatic animal'. Therefor setting word to the hash, and def to nil.
Here's my Rails class
class SkinnyEmployee
include ActiveModel::Validations
attr_accessor :uid, :name
validates :uid, :presence => true
def initialize(id, name)
#uid = id
#name = name
end
def ==(other)
puts "Calling =="
raise ArgumentError.new("other is nil or bad in "+self.to_s) if other.nil? or !other.instance_of?(SkinnyEmployee)
return (self.class == other.class && self.uid == other.uid)
end
alias :eql? :==
end
I have a hash of SkinnyEmployee objects. E.g.,
skinny_hash = {SkinnyEmployee.new("123", "xyz") => 1, SkinnyEmployee.new("456", "abc") => 2}
I have another SkinnyEmployee object that I want to look up. E.g.,
entry = SkinnyEmployee.new("456", "abc")
When I do
skinny_hash.keys.index(entry)
I get 1, as expected. But when I do
skinny_hash.has_key?(entry)
I get false.
Why is that? Doesn't has_key? also use == or eql? to find whether a key exists in a hash?
Thanks much for the help!
First, this drove me nuts. What you're doing looked absolutely correct to me, and, as you already know, doesn't work.
I can take you part of the way to a solution:
http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.0.0/Object.html#method-i-hash
quoting:
Generates a Fixnum hash value for this object. This function must have the property that a.eql?(b) implies a.hash == b.hash.
The hash value is used along with eql? by the Hash class to determine if two objects reference the same hash key. Any hash value that exceeds the capacity of a Fixnum will be truncated before being used.
I added:
def hash
1
end
to your SkinnyEmployee Class, and has_key? started returning true. Obviously that's not a solution, but I'm thinking it at least puts you on the path to one.
You have overwritten the eql? method used by Array#index but not the hash method used by Hash#has_key?.
From Ruby docs for Object#hash
Generates a Fixnum hash value for this object. This function must have the property that a.eql?(b) implies a.hash == b.hash.
The Object#hash and Object#eql? methods return equal if and only if the objects occupy the same space in memory. Some classes like Array overwrite both methods to return true if the compared array's have same elements.
For your case you can define the hash method like:
def hash
"#{self.class}_#{self.uid}".hash
end
This would satisfy the docs criteria for hash method given above.
That is happening because the object you are using as a key and they one you are using to search the key are different.
Every time you call SkinnyEmployee.new it will create a new, different, object. For example
employee_1 = SkinnyEmployee.new("123", "xyz")
employee_2 = SkinnyEmployee.new("123", "xyz")
employee_1 == employee_1 #=> true
employee_2 == employee_2 #=> true
employee_2 == employee_1 #=> false
If you call object_id on both employee_1 and employee_2 you will notice that it gives you different id's.
Using has_key? will check for the exact same object, and that won't be the case if you use SkinnyEmployee.new("456", "abc").
You would need a way to retrieve the exact same object, store it in a variable or in the DB, you are using as a key and use it as an attribute for has_key? for it to work.
Hope this can help you.