Your are very right. I shouldn't actually have the controller changing
the status at all. I should maybe have the controller call the models
change status method when called but that is it. And because the
method will now be in the model it wont be in the controller and I
wont be breaking dry like I thought of before.
I should have thought of that earlier once i realized destroy was
doing a little more work then actually destroying.
Thanks for the input, I knew I was looking at it from the wrong angle
it just felt wrong.
On Sep 5, 12:25 pm, pharrington <xenogene...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 3:07 pm, brianp <brian.o.pea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hey,
> > I was just wondering what the best practice for this situation would
> > be. I've got two models(word, definition) both with destroy methods in
> > the controllers that just change the model.status to "deleted". In the
> > words controller I'd like it to call the definition_controller destroy
> > method on definition models. And I'm just blanking on how to do this
> > like a regular model method. Would I have to double the destory method
> > in the model? Then I wouldn't be adhering to dry.
>
> > // words_controller.rb
> > def destroy
> > begin
> > ActiveRecord::Base.transaction do
> > @word = Word.find(params[:id], :include => :definitions)
> > @word.status = 'deleted'
> > @word.save
>
> > @word.definitions.each do |h|
> > h.destroy // Actually destorys the record instead of just
> > setting the status to "deleted"
> > end
> > end
> > rescue ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid => invalid
> > flash[:notice] = 'Word was not deleted'
> > render :action => "new"
> > end
>
> > respond_to do |format|
> > format.html { redirect_to(words_url) }
> > end
> > end
>
> > // definitions_controller.rb
> > def destroy
> > begin
> > ActiveRecord::Base.transaction do
> > @definition = Definition.find(params[:id])
> > @definition.status = 'deleted'
> > @definition.save
> > end
> > rescue ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid => invalid
> > flash[:notice] = 'Definition was not deleted'
> > render :controller => :words, :action => "new"
> > end
>
> > respond_to do |format|
> > format.html { redirect_to(words_url) }
> > end
> > end
>
> > Thanks,
> > bp
>
> I'm not sure how creating a method that sets the status attribute to
> "deleted" and saves the record would conflict with DRY principles?
> Also, it seems that the specifics of this what-would-be "mark_deleted"
> or maybe "set_status('deleted')" method is something the controller
> *probably* doesn't care about; more the controller just wants your
> model to perform a specific unit of logic.
>
> Moreover, it doesn't make sense (as far as I can see) to call a
> separate controller's actions outside the realm of the HTTP redirect
> dance. Controllers exist to sit in between your user's request and the
> view/content that they want rendered back, having the appropriate
> models perform whatever actual logic is required to make this happen.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
