Craig,
ARes loads up associated objects just fine for me when using the
same :include syntax as you do. Are you using any recent version
Rails? If you are - then I believe the default format for ARes models
was recently changed from xml to json, so just check you Rails logs to
see which of your fo
Hi there Steve,
The backend database is PostgreSQL, we wrote a migration script to import the
data from MS SQL Server. This took a little time to get right and get
consistent.
On the backend system and how it was built and how it runs, chat to me at the
next RoRo :)
Mikel
On 18/12/2011, a
Oops. Typo. Michael.should_be Mikel. Apologies.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or
Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to rails-oceania@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rails-oceania+unsubscr..
Hi All,
This is great. I often get clients / potential clients asking me about
Rails deployments and which better known sites are Rails apps.
@Michael: Just curious --- did you continue to use SQL Server as the
database (albeit with a new schema)? If not what did you use?
Also, being an onl
Awesome stuff Mikel.
I'm forwarding it to my boss. I'm doing Java work in a Microsoft shop at
the moment. ;)
Cheers,
Craig...
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Mikel Lindsaar wrote:
> Morning all,
>
> Some of you may know that we have been working with the ABC to totally
> rewrite their onlin
Thanks again to Oleg for pointing me towards ActiveResource.
I've been playing with it for a few days and it's working fairly well.
The one thing I don't have working yet is associations.
And from my googling around, it's not the easiest thing to get going.
I ghanged my "show" action in my raids
I think it is best used when the case of passing one argument is common,
but you want to support adding several things too.
[1,2,3].push(4) # common
[1,2,3].push(4,5) # uncommon but nice
[1,2,3].push(*[4,5]) # uncommon but supported
If it always had to take an array, then that first case would be
> Is there actually a good practical use for this method signature?
> Why not just accept an array?
I'd argue that in this particular case it's of little value, but who
knows, I'm sure there's a story behind it. As for varargs in general,
they seem to get added to nearly every language at some po
