You might want to split those two into named_scopes of their own though - for more modularity and possible scope chaining opportunities elsewhere in the code. Handling whether one of those arguments, which I presume are user entered, is blank can be handled in the controller.
On Jul 16, 5:32 pm, Jermaine <jermaine2...@gmail.com> wrote: > aaah I-C. > Okay thanks for clearing that up! great stuff > > On 16 jul, 14:16, Andy Jeffries <a...@andyjeffries.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. However what did you mean specifically with > > > your last comment? > > > > >> With anything like this any time you save when building up the > > > conditions > > > >> will be dwarfed by the time it takes to run the actual query > > > Putting words in Frederick's mouth, but it simply means that it's > > ridiculously quick to build up the conditions object in Ruby compared to > > actually executing the SQL on the database (and communicating the SQL and > > response over the socket). > > > Cheers, > > > Andy -- 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-t...@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.
