Say you have this structure:
class House < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :rooms
accepts_nested_attributes_for :rooms
attr_accessible :rooms_attributes
end
class Room < ActiveRecord::Base
has_one :tv
accepts_nested_attributes_for :tv
attr_accessible :tv_attributes
end
class Tv
belongs_to :user
attr_accessible :manufacturer
validates_presence_of :user
end
Notice that Tv's user is not accessible on purpose. So you have a tripple-nested form that allows you to enter house, rooms, and tvs on one page.
Here's the controller's create method:
def create
#house = House.new(params[:house])
if #house.save
# ... standard stuff
else
# ... standard stuff
end
end
Question: How in the world would you populate user_id for each tv (it should come from current_user.id)? What's the good practice?
Here's the catch22 I see in this.
Populate user_ids directly into params hash (they're pretty deeply nested)
Save will fail because user_ids are not mass-assignable
Populate user for every tv after #save is finished
Save will fail because user_id must be present
Even if we bypass the above, tvs will be without ids for a moment of time - sucks
Any decent way to do this?
Anything wrong with this?
def create
#house = House.new(params[:house])
#house.rooms.map {|room| room.tv }.each {|tv| tv.user = current_user }
if #house.save
# ... standard stuff
else
# ... standard stuff
end
end
I haven't tried this out, but it seems like the objects should be built and accessible at this point, even if not saved.
Related
An application I'm working on, is trying to use the concept of polymorphism without using polymorphism.
class User
has_many :notes
end
class Customer
has_many :notes
end
class Note
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :customer
end
Inherently we have two columns on notes: user_id and customer_id, now the bad thing here is it's possible for a note to now have a customer_id and a user_id at the same time, which I don't want.
I know a simple/better approach out of this is to make the notes table polymorphic, but there are some restrictions, preventing me from doing that right now.
I'd like to know if there are some custom ways of overriding these associations to ensure that when one is assigned, the other is unassigned.
Here are the ones I've tried:
def user_id=(id)
super
write_attribute('customer_id', nil)
end
def customer_id=(id)
super
write_attribute('user_id', nil)
end
This doesn't work when using:
note.customer=customer or
note.update(customer: customer)
but works when using:
note.update(customer_id: 12)
I basically need one that would work for both cases, without having to write 4 methods:
def user_id=(id)
end
def customer_id=(id)
end
def customer=(id)
end
def user=(id)
end
I would rather use ActiveRecord callbacks to achieve such results.
class Note
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :customer
before_save :correct_assignment
# ... your code ...
private
def correct_assignment
if user_changed?
self.customer = nil
elsif customer_changed?
self.user = nil
end
end
end
Attempting to make it so that when a user is created, based on whether they select to be a student or a corporate, rails will create that user either a student profile or a corporate profile.
Ive tried to set it up using Polymorphic associations however cant figure out how to generate the profile at the model layer based on what is selected in the view.
Models
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
has_secure_password
has_one :student_profile, dependent: :destroy
has_one :corporate_profile, dependent: :destroy
has_many :searches, dependent: :destroy
#attr_accessor :profile_type - removed due to Rails 4, pushed strong params in controller
before_create :create_profile
def create_profile
if profile_type == 1
build_student_profile
else
build_corporate_profile
end
end
end
Student and Corporate Profiles
class CorporateProfile < ActiveRecord::Base # or possibly inherit from ActiveRecord::Base if not using inheritance
belongs_to :user
end
class StudentProfile < ActiveRecord::Base # or possibly inherit from ActiveRecord::Base if not using inheritance
belongs_to :user
end
View
Here i have two radio buttons to decide which user type on the sign up form
<%= bootstrap_form_for(#user) do |f| %>
<div class="field">
<%= f.form_group :gender, label: { text: "Gender" }, help: "Are you a corporate or a student?" do %>
<p></p>
<%= f.radio_button :profileable, 1, label: "Student", inline: true %>
<%= f.radio_button :profileable, 2, label: "Corporate", inline: true %>
<% end %>
</div>
Users Controller
class UsersController < ApplicationController
def index
#users = User.paginate(page: params[:page], :per_page => 5).includes(:profile)
end
def show
if params[:id]
#user = User.find(params[:id])
# .includes(:profile)
else
#user = current_user
end
#searches = Search.where(user_id: #user).includes(:state, city: [:profile])
end
def new
#user = User.new
##corporateprofile = Corporateprofile.new
end
def create
#user = User.new(user_params)
if #user.save
session[:user_id] = #user.id
redirect_to widgets_index_path
else
redirect to '/signup'
end
end
private
def user_params
params.require(:user).permit(:firstname, :lastname, :email, :password, :profile_type)
end
end
And there is no passing code on the controller (as im stuck on that). Any better suggestion or ways to fix this would be much appreciated!
Cheers
First of all, you want to rename your profile classes to StudentProfile and CorporateProfile. This will necessitate running migrations to change your table names too.
The answer to this question depends on how different you want StudentProfile and CorporateProfile to be. If they are completely different or even mostly different, make them separate classes. If they are mostly the same (in other words, they share many of the same methods) you should create a Profile (or UserProfile) model and have StudentProfile and CorporateProfile inherit from this model.
As for implementation, it should look something like this:
# user.rb
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
has_one :student_profile
has_one :corporate_profile
attr_accessor :profileable #probably change this to profile_type. Using attr_accessible because we want to use it during creation, but no need to save it on the user model, although it may not be a bad idea to create a column for user model and save this value.
before_create :create_profile
def create_profile
if profileable == 1
build_student_profile
else
build_corporate_profile
end
end
end
# student_profile.rb
class StudentProfile < UserProfile # or possibly inherit from ActiveRecord::Base if not using inheritance
belongs_to :user
# other student profile stuff here
end
And corporate profile model would look the same as student profile.
Also, you should be using Rails 4 at this point, especially if you're learning and don't understand controllers and params, as this is pretty different between rails 3 and 4. No use in learning something that's outdated, right?
Edit: I should mention, I don't thing you're understanding rails polymorphism. A model should be polymorphic when it will belong to multiple models, not when it will have different subclasses.
For example, if your app has a Like model and something else like a Post model, and a user can like other users' profiles or posts, that might be a good candidate for polymorphism, because Like may belong to StudentProfiles or CorporateProfiles or Posts.
If I have a user that has_many user_logins and a user_logins that belongs to user - When a user_login is created I'm using UserLogin.create(userlogin_params) and then my strong params permits the user_id column - but this alone is not saving the current users I.D to the column as it is coming out as nil.
How do I make it save the I.D?
User model:
has_many :user_logins
UserLogin model
belongs_to :user
accepts_nested_attributes_for :user
UserLoginController:
...
def create
#user_login = UserLogin.new(user_login_params)
...
end
...
def user_login_params
param.require(:user_login).permit(
:user_login_attribute1,
:user_login_attribute2,
user_attributes: [
:id,
:user_attribute1,
:user_attribute2
]
)
end
Tell me if it helps.
There are 2 issues here at hand.
First: How do you create an association with the parent record automagically there?
Second: How do you do this so your controller action isn't a giant hole waiting for a hacker to stick their nose in.
You need to start from the parent, then build the child, not start with the child and build the parent.
Consider the following:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :logins, class_name: "UserLogin"
end
class UserLogin < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :user
end
class UserLoginsController < ApplicationController
def create
if new_user_login(user_login_params).save
redirect_to :wherever
else
render :new
end
end
private
def new_user_login(attrs={})
current_user.logins.create(attrs)
end
def user_login_params
param.require(:user_login).permit(:attr_1, :attr_1)
end
Do not pass IDs into any secure params hash unless that ID is selectable by the user. If you allow an ID into secure params, a hacker can start moving records around to other objects and destroy your database integrity.
If you would like pairing help on this problem live and in person, you can check out my codementor profile at https://codementor.io/rubycasts/#reviews
Let's keep this simple. Let's say I have a User model and a Post model:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
# id:integer name:string deleted:boolean
has_many :posts
end
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
# id:integer user_id:integer content:string deleted:boolean
belongs_to :user
end
Now, let's say an admin wants to "delete" (hide) a post. So basically he, through the system, sets a post's deleted attribute to 1. How should I now display this post in the view? Should I create a virtual attribute on the post like this:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
# id:integer user_id:integer content:string deleted:boolean
belongs_to :user
def administrated_content
if !self.deleted
self.content
else
"This post has been removed"
end
end
end
While that would work, I want to implement the above in a large number of models, and I can't help feeling that copy+pasting the above comparative into all of my models could be DRYer. A lot dryer.
I also think putting a deleted column in every single deletable model in my app feels a bit cumbersome too. I feel I should have a 'state' table. What are your thoughts on this:
class State
#id:integer #deleted:boolean #deleted_by:integer
belongs_to :user
belongs_to :post
end
and then querying self.state.deleted in the comparator? Would this require a polymorphic table? I've only attempted polymorphic once and I couldn't get it to work. (it was on a pretty complex self-referential model, mind). And this still doesn't address the problem of having a very, very similar class method in my models to check if an instance is deleted or not before displaying content.
In the deleted_by attribute, I'm thinking of placing the admin's id who deleted it. But what about when an admin undelete a post? Maybe I should just have an edited_by id.
How do I set up a dependent: :destroy type relationship between the user and his posts? Because now I want to do this: dependent: :set_deleted_to_0 and I'm not sure how to do this.
Also, we don't simply want to set the post's deleted attributes to 1, because we actually want to change the message our administrated_content gives out. We now want it to say, This post has been removed because of its user has been deleted. I'm sure I could jump in and do something hacky, but I want to do it properly from the start.
I also try to avoid gems when I can because I feel I'm missing out on learning.
I usually use a field named deleted_at for this case:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
scope :not_deleted, lambda { where(deleted_at: nil) }
scope :deleted, lambda { where("#{self.table_name}.deleted_at IS NOT NULL") }
def destroy
self.update(deleted_at: DateTime.current)
end
def delete
destroy
end
def deleted?
self.deleted_at.present?
end
# ...
Want to share this functionnality between multiple models?
=> Make an extension of it!
# lib/extensions/act_as_fake_deletable.rb
module ActAsFakeDeletable
# override the model actions
def destroy
self.update(deleted_at: DateTime.current)
end
def delete
self.destroy
end
def undestroy # to "restore" the file
self.update(deleted_at: nil)
end
def undelete
self.undestroy
end
# define new scopes
def self.included(base)
base.class_eval do
scope :destroyed, where("#{self.table_name}.deleted_at IS NOT NULL")
scope :not_destroyed, where(deleted_at: nil)
scope :deleted, lambda { destroyed }
scope :not_deleted, lambda { not_destroyed }
end
end
end
class ActiveRecord::Base
def self.act_as_fake_deletable(options = {})
alias_method :destroy!, :destroy
alias_method :delete!, :delete
include ActAsFakeDeletable
options = { field_to_hide: :content, message_to_show_instead: "This content has been deleted" }.merge!(options)
define_method options[:field_to_hide].to_sym do
return options[:message_to_show_instead] if self.deleted_at.present?
self.read_attribute options[:field_to_hide].to_sym
end
end
end
Usage:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
act_as_fake_deletable
Overwriting the defaults:
class Book < ActiveRecord::Base
act_as_fake_deletable field_to_hide: :title, message_to_show_instead: "This book has been deleted man, sorry!"
Boom! Done.
Warning: This module overwrite the ActiveRecord's destroy and delete methods, which means you won't be able to destroy your record using those methods anymore. Instead of overwriting you could create a new method, named soft_destroy for example. So in your app (or console), you would use soft_destroy when relevant and use the destroy/delete methods when you really want to "hard destroy" the record.
I'm using Rails' accepts_nested_attributes_for method with great success, but how can I have it not create new records if a record already exists?
By way of example:
Say I've got three models, Team, Membership, and Player, and each team has_many players through memberships, and players can belong to many teams. The Team model might then accept nested attributes for players, but that means that each player submitted through the combined team+player(s) form will be created as a new player record.
How should I go about doing things if I want to only create a new player record this way if there isn't already a player with the same name? If there is a player with the same name, no new player records should be created, but instead the correct player should be found and associated with the new team record.
When you define a hook for autosave associations, the normal code path is skipped and your method is called instead. Thus, you can do this:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :author, :autosave => true
accepts_nested_attributes_for :author
# If you need to validate the associated record, you can add a method like this:
# validate_associated_record_for_author
def autosave_associated_records_for_author
# Find or create the author by name
if new_author = Author.find_by_name(author.name)
self.author = new_author
else
self.author.save!
end
end
end
This code is untested, but it should be pretty much what you need.
Don't think of it as adding players to teams, think of it as adding memberships to teams. The form doesn't work with the players directly. The Membership model can have a player_name virtual attribute. Behind the scenes this can either look up a player or create one.
class Membership < ActiveRecord::Base
def player_name
player && player.name
end
def player_name=(name)
self.player = Player.find_or_create_by_name(name) unless name.blank?
end
end
And then just add a player_name text field to any Membership form builder.
<%= f.text_field :player_name %>
This way it is not specific to accepts_nested_attributes_for and can be used in any membership form.
Note: With this technique the Player model is created before validation happens. If you don't want this effect then store the player in an instance variable and then save it in a before_save callback.
A before_validation hook is a good choice: it's a standard mechanism resulting in simpler code than overriding the more obscure autosave_associated_records_for_*.
class Quux < ActiveRecord::Base
has_and_belongs_to_many :foos
accepts_nested_attributes_for :foos, reject_if: ->(object){ object[:value].blank? }
before_validation :find_foos
def find_foos
self.foos = self.foos.map do |object|
Foo.where(value: object.value).first_or_initialize
end
end
end
When using :accepts_nested_attributes_for, submitting the id of an existing record will cause ActiveRecord to update the existing record instead of creating a new record. I'm not sure what your markup is like, but try something roughly like this:
<%= text_field_tag "team[player][name]", current_player.name %>
<%= hidden_field_tag "team[player][id]", current_player.id if current_player %>
The Player name will be updated if the id is supplied, but created otherwise.
The approach of defining autosave_associated_record_for_ method is very interesting. I'll certainly use that! However, consider this simpler solution as well.
Just to round things out in terms of the question (refers to find_or_create), the if block in Francois' answer could be rephrased as:
self.author = Author.find_or_create_by_name(author.name) unless author.name.blank?
self.author.save!
This works great if you have a has_one or belongs_to relationship. But fell short with a has_many or has_many through.
I have a tagging system that utilizes a has_many :through relationship. Neither of the solutions here got me where I needed to go so I came up with a solution that may help others. This has been tested on Rails 3.2.
Setup
Here are a basic version of my Models:
Location Object:
class Location < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :city_taggables, :as => :city_taggable, :dependent => :destroy
has_many :city_tags, :through => :city_taggables
accepts_nested_attributes_for :city_tags, :reject_if => :all_blank, allow_destroy: true
end
Tag Objects
class CityTaggable < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :city_tag
belongs_to :city_taggable, :polymorphic => true
end
class CityTag < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :city_taggables, :dependent => :destroy
has_many :ads, :through => :city_taggables
end
Solution
I did indeed override the autosave_associated_recored_for method as follows:
class Location < ActiveRecord::Base
private
def autosave_associated_records_for_city_tags
tags =[]
#For Each Tag
city_tags.each do |tag|
#Destroy Tag if set to _destroy
if tag._destroy
#remove tag from object don't destroy the tag
self.city_tags.delete(tag)
next
end
#Check if the tag we are saving is new (no ID passed)
if tag.new_record?
#Find existing tag or use new tag if not found
tag = CityTag.find_by_label(tag.label) || CityTag.create(label: tag.label)
else
#If tag being saved has an ID then it exists we want to see if the label has changed
#We find the record and compare explicitly, this saves us when we are removing tags.
existing = CityTag.find_by_id(tag.id)
if existing
#Tag labels are different so we want to find or create a new tag (rather than updating the exiting tag label)
if tag.label != existing.label
self.city_tags.delete(tag)
tag = CityTag.find_by_label(tag.label) || CityTag.create(label: tag.label)
end
else
#Looks like we are removing the tag and need to delete it from this object
self.city_tags.delete(tag)
next
end
end
tags << tag
end
#Iterate through tags and add to my Location unless they are already associated.
tags.each do |tag|
unless tag.in? self.city_tags
self.city_tags << tag
end
end
end
The above implementation saves, deletes and changes tags the way I needed when using fields_for in a nested form. I'm open to feedback if there are ways to simplify. It is important to point out that I am explicitly changing tags when the label changes rather than updating the tag label.
Answer by #François Beausoleil is awesome and solved a big problem. Great to learn about the concept of autosave_associated_record_for.
However, I found one corner case in this implementation. In case of update of existing post's author(A1), if a new author name(A2) is passed, it will end up changing the original(A1) author's name.
p = Post.first
p.author #<Author id: 1, name: 'JK Rowling'>
# now edit is triggered, and new author(non existing) is passed(e.g: Cal Newport).
p.author #<Author id: 1, name: 'Cal Newport'>
Oringinal code:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :author, :autosave => true
accepts_nested_attributes_for :author
# If you need to validate the associated record, you can add a method like this:
# validate_associated_record_for_author
def autosave_associated_records_for_author
# Find or create the author by name
if new_author = Author.find_by_name(author.name)
self.author = new_author
else
self.author.save!
end
end
end
It is because, in case of edit, self.author for post will already be an author with id:1, it will go in else, block and will update that author instead of creating new one.
I changed the code(elsif condition) to mitigate this issue:
class Post < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :author, :autosave => true
accepts_nested_attributes_for :author
# If you need to validate the associated record, you can add a method like this:
# validate_associated_record_for_author
def autosave_associated_records_for_author
# Find or create the author by name
if new_author = Author.find_by_name(author.name)
self.author = new_author
elsif author && author.persisted? && author.changed?
# New condition: if author is already allocated to post, but is changed, create a new author.
self.author = Author.new(name: author.name)
else
# else create a new author
self.author.save!
end
end
end
#dustin-m's answer was instrumental for me - I am doing something custom with a has_many :through relationship. I have a Topic which has one Trend, which has many children (recursive).
ActiveRecord does not like it when I configure this as a standard has_many :searches, through: trend, source: :children relationship. It retrieves topic.trend and topic.searches but won't do topic.searches.create(name: foo).
So I used the above to construct a custom autosave and am achieving the correct result with accepts_nested_attributes_for :searches, allow_destroy: true
def autosave_associated_records_for_searches
searches.each do | s |
if s._destroy
self.trend.children.delete(s)
elsif s.new_record?
self.trend.children << s
else
s.save
end
end
end