There is supposed to be a rewrite in the near future of Actiive
Record's with_scope which is the underlying implementation mechanism
for named_scopes. It would probably be a good idea to create a ticket
in Lighthouse with a patch with failing tests so that they can be
addressed when the rewrite h
Thanks everyone for your input. There is now a ticket:
http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/2253-named_scope-and-nested-order-clauses
Erik
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
I have a question about peoples opinions about how nested named_scopes
should handle :order options.
What are your opinions about the correct behavior for the following
chained named_scopes?
Take the model:
class Developer < ActiveRecord::Base
named_scope :by_last_name, :order => 'last_name'
I have added a patch to ticket #805 that fixes what I believe is a
behavior that violates the principle of least surprise.
If the current URI is '/blog/posts' then current_page?(:controller =>
'blog', :action => 'posts') returns true as expected. However if the
current URI is '/blog/posts?order=
I have added a patch for the following ticket:
http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/924-render-partial-object-nil-with-instance-variable#ticket-924-1
This fixes the current unexpected behavior when overriding a non nil
instance variable with nil when rendering a partial.
--~--~-