Colin Law wrote in post #990676: > I have posted a question on the rails core list asking whether there > is a bug in tableize or whether this is as expected. > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core/browse_thread/thread/c3b4ec662226e2a7?hl=en >
Thanks! > You are entirely free to choose controller names and associated routes > as you wish, neither has anything to do with model names. There is > often a 1:1 relationship between models and controllers. You can > therefore allow rails to call the model KnownIp but have the > *controller* and routes as known_ips. Just make sure that in the > controller you reference the model by its actual name (KnownIp). > > In addition it is possible to override the table name for a model > using set_table_name in the model. Whether it is valid to have a > model KnownIP in a file known_ip.rb I do not know. Forget about the > model generator and try it and see. Don't forget to remove any old > files of similar names from the models directory. I know this, my question is specifically about naming files where the classes are defined. In particular, if it is possible to define class KnownIPsController < ApplicationController end in a file named "known_ips_controller.rb". I suspect that the answer is "No". Should the route be match "see" => "known_i_ps#show" or match "see" => "known_ips#show" in this case? None works, the errors are, respectively, uninitialized constant KnownIPsController and Expected .../test_app/app/controllers/known_ips_controller.rb to define KnownIpsController Alexey. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- 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 [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-talk?hl=en.
