findchris,
I'm a bit reluctant to put my patch up for serious consideration
because it currently lacks tests and would rightfully get slapped down
pretty quickly.
Care to try your hand at writing the tests? I'd be willing to
patchify my solution sometime in the next two or three weeks if that
wo
Peter,
Not sure how I missed your message
Anyway, my decision to reference a scope on the join model was easy:
if it's referenced on the target their is confusion/ambiguity should
you also desire a scope on the target model. For example...
class User < AR::Base
has_many :contracts
has_
You might try updating the lighthouse ticket with this patch to try to
drum up support. Seems quite useful.
+1
On Apr 22, 8:39 am, Chris Cruft wrote:
> I've expanded my monkey patch (see it here:http://gist.github.com/88448)
> to the point where I wouldn't call it proof of concept anymore. It
Beautiful! This is exactly what I was looking for. Just thought I
would give you guys some positive reinforcement about how useful this
is so that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.
I see this version requires the scopes to be defined in the join
model? I also had the same reaction that they sh
I've expanded my monkey patch (see it here: http://gist.github.com/88448)
to the point where I wouldn't call it proof of concept anymore. It
works very nicely in practice as well. The concept of scoped
associations and composing of scopes, regardless of my implementation,
seems strong. Luke, I
And here is the monkey patch for getting scoped join models (and
targets):
http://gist.github.com/88448
This is a "proof of concept" patch. It only scopes has_many
associations (and has_many/has_one :through =>
indirectly). Scoping has_one should be a trivial matter of
adding :scope as a va
The named_scope macro introduces a concise syntax for a complex set of
[:order, :conditions, :joins, :include, :offset, :limit, :readonly]
options for a model class. The options for the association macros use
most of those SAME OPTIONS. My first suggestion is that association
macros accept a :sc
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
This thread risks getting stale, which would be a shame because the
need is obvious and we've got a couple of good proposals on the
table. I took the time to more carefully review Ryan's proposed
syntax, and I'm loving it. I will try to work up an implementation
but I'll probably need someone el
I'm liking all of this goodness. I suspect that the syntax of Ryan's
solution will be more appealing to most.
On Feb 27, 1:45 pm, Ryan Bates wrote:
> -1 on inheritance solution. It is creative, but I imagine that can get
> messy very quickly if you have multiple attributes you're trying to do
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
