Thanks for the reply, Michael. On May 23, 3:16 pm, Michael Koziarski <[email protected]> wrote: > > Shouldn't form_for be keying off of ":as => :thread" and using > > threads_path/thread_path instead of forum_threads_path/ > > forum_thread_path ? > > No, not as currently designed and implemented. The mapping from > instance to route helper name is done without consulting the routing > definitions at all, it's driven entirely off the class name and a few > simple conventions. This has the downside that you get the errors > that you're seeing now. But there's also the upside that you can have > those helpers call routes defined in ways other than resources. e.g. > manually connecting posts to a URL then using form_for @post.
That's what I was afraid of. I certainly enjoy the simplicity of form_for @post, but it would also be very useful for :as => :thread to influence the routing that's generated (or to have some option that influences the generated routing). The downside would appear to be that if you have a controller whose name doesn't perfectly match to a named route that you're stuck having to implement a separate form for the new and edit cases, which is a non-DRY bummer. -J -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
