U try ?
escopo: find_visibles, lambda { find_in_coverage|find_know_
missing}
2012/5/22 azizmb.in <m...@azizmb.in>
> Hi Gustavo
>
> Coincidentally, I was recently doing something similar. Older versions of
> rails used to evaluate my previous solution using " | " to an
> ActiveRelation. When this stopped I dont know, or maybe I am just mistaken.
> In any case, I finally settled on using the squeel
> gem<https://github.com/ernie/squeel>,
> the arel docs, I agree are quite horrible.
>
> There are examples on 'OR' queries with squeel on the github readme.
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Gustavo de Sá Carvalho Honorato <
> gustavohonor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @Rogerio: This way the scopes are merged with AND not OR
>>
>> @Jeremy: I've read README and I haven't found a way to join scopes with
>> OR, as you mentioned. The only way I found is to join attributes with OR,
>> not scopes. I've tried that hack (where_clauses.join('OR')) before too. The
>> problem is that, for some reason, it don't work when we use the scope
>> chained with a association.
>>
>> I've googled a lot and I found a lot of people complaining about this
>> missing feature. I'm a big fan of Rails, but it is a pitty that Rails
>> doesn't give any simple way to do that. I really want to avoid that, but
>> the best solution that I can see is to duplicate the code of the first two
>> scopes on find_visibles.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gustavo
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Rogerio Medeiros <arge...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> try
>>>
>>> escopo: find_visibles, lambda { find_in_coverage.find_know_missing}
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/5/21 Gustavo de Sá Carvalho Honorato <gustavohonor...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> The problem of the first solution is that "find_in_coverage |
>>>> find_known_missing" combined that way does not return a scope. It returns
>>>> two arrays each and applies | operator on the result. See:
>>>> http://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Array.html#method-i-7C
>>>>
>>>> I've looked arel docs (in fact, I just found poor docs). Can you please
>>>> point me where in docs is explaining how I can construct such query?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for you attention,
>>>> Gustavo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 3:52 PM, azizmb.in <m...@azizmb.in> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To add to that, if you want to construct complex queries, you should
>>>>> have a look at arel <https://github.com/rails/arel>.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 12:17 AM, azizmb.in <m...@azizmb.in> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> AFAIK, something like this should work:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> def find_visibles
>>>>>> find_in_coverage | find_known_missing
>>>>>> end
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Gustavo de Sá Carvalho Honorato <
>>>>>> gustavohonor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've googled all over and I couldn't find anything about chaining
>>>>>>> scopes with OR instead of the default AND.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have an Asset model with the following scopes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> class Asset < ActiveRecord::Base
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (...)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scope :find_in_coverage, lambda {
>>>>>>> where('timestamp(assets.found_at) >= ?', Asset.found_at_limit) }
>>>>>>> scope :find_unknown_in_coverage, where('assets.asset_type_id IS
>>>>>>> NULL').find_in_coverage
>>>>>>> scope :find_known_missing, lambda { where('assets.found_at < ? AND
>>>>>>> assets.asset_type_id IS NOT NULL', Asset.found_at_limit) }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to create another scope ("find_visibles") which is the
>>>>>>> OR of "find_in_coverage" and "find_known_missing" scopes, like that:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> scope :find_visibles, find_in_coverage.find_know_missing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem is that this method chain uses AND to concatenate WHERE
>>>>>>> clauses. I need this clauses to be concatenated using OR instead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can I do that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>> Gustavo Honorato
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>> Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to
>>>>>>> rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>>>> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> - Aziz M. Bookwala
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Website <http://azizmb.in/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/azizbookwala>
>>>>>> | Github <http://github.com/azizmb>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - Aziz M. Bookwala
>>>>>
>>>>> Website <http://azizmb.in/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/azizbookwala>
>>>>> | Github <http://github.com/azizmb>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com
>>>>> .
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> att,
>>>
>>> Rogerio
>>>
>>> A complicação se descomplica na mesma proporção que fazemos os nós se
>>> desatarem ao tecer o conhecimento do saber.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> - Aziz M. Bookwala
>
> Website <http://azizmb.in/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/azizbookwala>
> | Github <http://github.com/azizmb>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
>
--
att,
Rogerio
A complicação se descomplica na mesma proporção que fazemos os nós se
desatarem ao tecer o conhecimento do saber.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
