Given a simple namespaced route
map.namespace :api do |api|
api.resources :genres
end
how can I reuse this block but with another namespace?
Currently I'm achieving that by writing another routes hacked on the fly
map.with_options :name_prefix => 'mobile_', :path_prefix => 'mobile' do |mobile|
mobile.resources :genres, :controller => 'api/genres'
end
But it seems less than ideal.
I believe the , :controller => 'api/genres' option is your only approach. Only cleanup I can see is: map.namespace :mobile.
Related
I was viewing an episode in RailsCasts and was looking at the source code for episode 145.
This was his code for the routes.rb file
ActionController::Routing::Routes.draw do |map|
map.resources :orders
map.current_cart 'cart', :controller => 'carts', :action => 'show', :id => 'current'
map.resources :line_items
map.resources :carts
map.resources :products
map.resources :categories
map.root :products
end
I was immediately thrown off. That looked like an entirely different syntax. Then I realized that this source code was published in 2010. I'm wondering if it's now obsolete, because I copied and pasted that code into my Rails Application and it isn't working.
Usually, what I do is
resources 'orders'
root 'products'
I don't know how I would rewrite map.current_cart.
This is the error message I get
NameError at/orders/new
undefined local variable or method 'map' for #<ActionDispatch::Routing::Mapper::0x4d90868>
This line is highlighted
map.current_cart 'cart', :controller => 'carts', :action => 'show', :id => 'current'
Yes it is obsolete now.
Instead of map.resources just use resources.
So you should write
resources :orders
In Rails 4+ it would look something like this:
My::Application.routes.draw do
get '/cart', to: 'carts#show', defaults: { id: 'current' }
end
That may be post if that's how the route is exercised.
The map argument is now gone. My::Application depends on the name of the application in question.
As always, have the routing documentation handy when doing things like this.
If you're working on an older application you will have to follow the older conventions.
I am working on an assignment which includes adding a feature to Typo.
rake routes shows:
admin_content /admin/content {:controller=>"admin/content", :action=>"index"}
/admin/content(/:action(/:id)) {:action=>nil, :id=>nil, :controller=>"admin/content"}
I need to create a route helper which matches the following RESTful route: /admin/content/edit/:id and an example of url is /admin/content/edit/1
But I can't figure out how to do it. I tried something like admin_content_path(edit,some_article) but it didn't work. (some_article is just an article object)
In routes.rb file:
# some other code
# Admin/XController
%w{advanced cache categories comments content profiles feedback general pages
resources sidebar textfilters themes trackbacks users settings tags redirects seo post_types }.each do |i|
match "/admin/#{i}", :to => "admin/#{i}#index", :format => false
match "/admin/#{i}(/:action(/:id))", :to => "admin/#{i}", :action => nil, :id => nil, :format => false
end
#some other code
Thanks a lot for your help!
If you are using RESTful routes, why not use the Rails default routes?
So your routes.rb would look like
namespace :admin do
resources :content
resources :advanced
resources :categories
resources :comments
...
<etc>
end
This does assume all your controllers are in the folder admin (but from your comment this seems to be the case.
If you do that, you can just use the standard route-helper: edit_admin_content_path.
If you want to do it manually, you should try adding a name to your route. E.g. as follows:
match "/admin/#{i}/:action(/:id)" => "admin/#{i}", :as => "admin_#{i}_with_action"
and then you should do something like
admin_content_with_action(:action => 'edit', :id => whatevvvva)
As a side-note: I really do not like the meta-programming in your config/routes.rb, if for whatever you really find that the default resources are not a right fit, I would advise to use methods instead (as explained here)
So for example in your config/routes.rb you would write:
def add_my_resource(resource_name)
match "/#{resource_name}", :to => "#{resource_name}#index", :format => false
match "/#{resource_name}(/:action(/:id))", :to => "#{resource_name}", :as => 'admin_#{resource_name}_with_action", :action => nil, :id => nil, :format => false
end
namespace :admin do
add_my_resource :content
add_my_resource :advanced
add_my_resource :categories
...
end
which imho is much more readable.
But my advice, unless you really-really need to avoid it, would be to use the standard resources since you do not seem to add anything special.
HTH.
I'm getting the following error:
Unknown action
No action responded to show. Actions: activate, destroy, index, org_deals, search, and suspend
Controller:
class Admin::HomepagesController < Admin::ApplicationController
def org_deals
#organization = Organization.find(:all)
end
Routes:
map.root :controller => 'main'
map.admin '/admin', :controller => 'admin/main'
map.namespace :admin do |admin|
admin.resources :organizations, :collection => {:search => :get}, :member => {:suspend => :get, :activate => :get}
To note: This is a controller inside of a controller.
Any idea why this is defaulting to show?
Update:
I updated what the routes syntax is. Read that article, and tried quite a few variations but its still adamantly looking for a show.
Firstly, it looks like your routes file has the wrong syntax. If you are trying to establish routes for nested resources, you'd do it like so:
map.resources :admin
admin.resources :organizations
end
This would give you paths such as:
/admin/
/admin/1
/admin/1/organizations
/admin/1/organizations/1
The mapping from route to controller/action is done via a Rails convention, where HTTP verbs are assigned in ways that are useful for the typical CRUD operations. For example:
/admin/1/organizations/1
would map to several actions in the OrganizationsController, distinguished by the type of verb:
/admin/1/organizations/1 # GET -> :action => :show
/admin/1/organizations/1 # PUT -> :action => :update
/admin/1/organizations/1 # DELETE -> :action => :destroy
"Show" is one of the seven standard resourceful actions that Rails gives you by default. You can exclude "show" with the directive :except => :show, or specify only the resourceful actions you want with :only => :update, for example.
I recommend you look at Rails Routing from the Outside In, which is a great introduction to this topic.
EDIT
I see I ignored the namespacing in my answer, sorry. How about this:
map.namespace(:admin) do |admin|
admin.resources :homepages, :member => { :org_deals => :get }
end
This will generate your org_deals action as a GET with an id parameter (for the organization). You also get a show route, along with the six other resourceful routes. rake routes shows this:
org_deals_admin_homepage GET /admin/homepages/:id/org_deals(.:format) {:controller=>"admin/homepages", :action=>"org_deals"}
Of course your homepages_controller.rb has to live in app/controllers/admin/
EDIT redux
Actually, you want organizations in the path, I'll bet, in which case:
map.namespace(:admin) do |admin|
admin.resources :organizations, :controller => :homepages, :member => { :org_deals => :get }
end
which gives you:
org_deals_admin_organization GET /admin/organizations/:id/org_deals(.:format) {:controller=>"admin/homepages", :action=>"org_deals"}
By specifying admin.resources ... you are telling Rails you want the seven default different routes in your application. If you do not want them, and only want the ones you specify, do not use .resources. Show is called because that's the default route called for a GET request with a path such as /admin/id when you have the default resources.
With a standard map.resource routing mechanics and several nested resources the resultant routes are unnecessarily long. Consider the following route:
site.org/users/pavelshved/blogs/blogging-horror/posts/12345
It's easy to create in routes.rb, and I'm sure it follows some kind of beneficial routing logic. But it's way too long and also seems like it's not intended to be human-readable.
A nice improvement would be to drop controller names, so it looks like:
site.org/pavelshved/blogging-horror/12345
Clear, simple, short. It may become ambiguous, but in my case I'm not going to name any user "users", for instance.
I tried setting :as => '', but it yields routes like this: site.org//pavelshved//blogging-horror//12345 when generating them by standard helpers.
Is there a way to map resources in such a way, that controller names become optional?
You're looking for the :path_prefix option for resources.
map.resources :users do |user|
user.resources :blogs do |blog|
blog.resources :posts, :path_prefix => '/:user_login/:blog_title/:id'
end
end
Will produce restful routes for all blogs of this form: site.org/pavelshved/bogging-horror/posts/1234. You'll need to go to a little extra effort to use the url helpers but nothing a wrapper of your own couldn't quickly fix.
The only way to get rid of the posts part of the url is with named routes, but those require some duplication to make restful. And you'll run into the same problems when trying to use route helpers.
The simplest way to get what you want would be to create a route in addition to your RESTful routes that acts as a shorthand:
map.short_blog ':user_id/:blog_id/:id', :controller => 'posts', :action => 'show'
You'll have to change the URL bits to work with how you're filtering the name of the user and the name of their blog. But then when you want to use the shorter URL you can use all the short_blog_* magic.
Straight out of the default routes.rb:
map.connect 'products/:id', :controller => 'catalog', :action => 'view'
You could write:
map.connect ':user_id/:blog_id/:id', :controller => 'posts', :action => 'show'
But be sure to include that in the very end of the file, or it will try to match every three levels deep url to it.
Try this
map.pavelshved '/pavelshved/', :controller => :users, :action => view or
map.pavelshved '/:id', :controller => :users, :action => show do | blogs|
blogs.bloging '/:id', :controller => :blogs, :action => show do | post|
post.posting '/:id', :controller => :posts, :action => show
end
end
I hope it work :)
Google "rails shallow routes" for information about this.
If I want to provide an alias for a controller, I can use map.resources :rants, :controller => 'blog_posts' yoursite.com/rants points to the blog_posts controller fine.
How do I give an alias to a nested resource, for example yoursite.com/users/5/rants ?
You may want to try:
map.resources :rants, :controller => 'blog_posts'
map.resources :users do |users|
users.resources :rants, :controller => 'blog_posts'
end
This will give you the yoursite.com/users/5/rants/ url that you are looking for and it will generate the handy methods (for example: users_rants_path(#user))
Hope this helps.