On Jan 16, 2008 12:41 PM, Rick DeNatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 1/16/08, ara.t.howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Pratik wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Btw, I like the idea of renaming it to Application instead of
> > > ApplicationController, in case we *m
On Jan 12, 5:26 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm definitely keen on fixing it up, I'm just worried that a torrent
> of empty +1s may swamp any back-and-forth about the risks and benefits
> to making the change.
Please excuse my silly question, but what if people want to ha
From: rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick DeNatale
> No super method for find_by_ip is found, so method_missing gets called.
Ah, in the calling object, not in the superclass.
> (note I said overwrites rather than overrides)
Thanks, that's a pet peeve
On 1/16/08, Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I must be missing something, because I don't see how the "manual" method
> could be overwritten. The creation of the dynamic finder happens in
> method_missing, which wouldn't be called if the method existed, right?
Right, if the method exis
The build failed.
CHANGES
---
Revision 8650 committed by nzkoz on 2008-01-16 21:56:45
Correct fix for [8647], Closes #6868. [isak]
M
/trunk/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/postgresql_adapter.rb
TEST FAILURES AND ERRORS
---
Name: test_fragment_cach
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:26:00AM -0800, Carr0t wrote:
> This came up when I migrated from rails 1.2.3 to 2.0.2. Previously, my
> code was working fine. I am using
> a mysql backend database, in which I am storing IPv4 addresses as 32
> bit unsigned integers. Of course, I don't want my users to h
He calls super, which calls the method_missing
On 16 Jan 2008, at 19:55, Mark Wilden wrote:
>
> From: rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan De Poorter
>
>> When you call a dynamic finder action (in your case find_by_ip), the
>> ruby method_missing functio
From: rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan De Poorter
>When you call a dynamic finder action (in your case find_by_ip), the
>ruby method_missing function is called. This magic functions takes the
>function you requested and creates it, which causes your
On 1/16/08, ara.t.howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Pratik wrote:
>
> >
> > Btw, I like the idea of renaming it to Application instead of
> > ApplicationController, in case we *must* change it.
> >
>
> Application::Controller
> Application::Model
> Application::V
On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Xavier Noria wrote:
> We have application_helper.rb, and I am working on
> application_model.rb as per some mails in the middle of the thread.
OK, here we go!!!
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/10832
-- fxn
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Pratik wrote:
>
> Btw, I like the idea of renaming it to Application instead of
> ApplicationController, in case we *must* change it.
>
Application::Controller
Application::Model
Application::View
Applcation::Config
we need all these - why not just see into the fut
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Sven Fuchs wrote:
> Did that answer your question?
Yes, thanks.
Michael
--
Michael Schuerig
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.schuerig.de/michael/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
On Jan 15, 9:56 pm, "Michael Koziarski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Should I fix my test because this is desired new behavior? Or submit
> > a patch instead?
>
> This doesn't sound like a deliberate change. Please send a patch with
> failing tests and we'll get it applied.
>
> --
> Cheers
>
>
Am 16.01.2008 um 16:33 schrieb Pratik:
>> So, yes, there's a real benefit.
> Could you explain on that part ?
Just did that in the other mail. http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/138628#618338
Please let me know if that doesn't answer the question.
> Btw, I like the idea of renaming it to Applicati
On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Pratik wrote:
> Btw, I like the idea of renaming it to Application instead of
> ApplicationController, in case we *must* change it.
Application is too generic in my opinion. That is a file related to
controllers, not to the application as a whole.
We have applicat
On 16 Jan 2008, at 15:37, Jan De Poorter wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> When you call a dynamic finder action (in your case find_by_ip), the
> ruby method_missing function is called. This magic functions takes the
> function you requested and creates it, which causes your function to
> be overwritten in fav
Hi,
When you call a dynamic finder action (in your case find_by_ip), the
ruby method_missing function is called. This magic functions takes the
function you requested and creates it, which causes your function to
be overwritten in favor of the created function. When you reload!,
your mode
On Jan 16, 2008 12:33 PM, Sven Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This actually would make authoring plugins that "monkeypatch"
> application controllers easier, yes.
>
> Right now one has to jump through hoops to do that (and, above all,
> know which ones and how).
>
> "monkeypatch" in quotes as
As suggested in my thread in Ruby On Rails: Talk (http://
groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk/browse_thread/thread/
66ae64e6581a3896) i'm posting an issue i'm having with Rails 2.0 and
overloading find_by methods here. Hoepfully someone can either suggest
what I am doing wrong and should be d
On Jan 16, 2008, at 7:24 AM, Sven Fuchs wrote:
> Did that answer your question?
and +2 from me.
a @ http://codeforpeople.com/
--
share your knowledge. it's a way to achieve immortality.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
Am 16.01.2008 um 14:54 schrieb Michael Schuerig:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Sven Fuchs wrote:
>>> For example, are there any changes for plugin authors? Does this
>>> make *something* they do any easier?
>>
>> This actually would make authoring plugins that "monkeypatch"
>> application cont
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Sven Fuchs wrote:
> > For example, are there any changes for plugin authors? Does this
> > make *something* they do any easier?
>
> This actually would make authoring plugins that "monkeypatch"
> application controllers easier, yes.
>
> Right now one has to jump t
A little correction. I'm the "-1" guy. "+" was a typo :)
On Jan 15, 2008 5:48 PM, Pratik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 5:45 PM, Gabe da Silveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Maybe Rails has matured to
> > the point where this kind of fix is simply too painful relative to the
> >
> Without an identity map this is very difficult to fix. The correct
> fix for this bug would require full bi-directional has_many and
> belongs/to associations, and could take a bit of work.
>
> If someone wants to investigate this, I'd be happy to lend a helping
> hand. On the other hand, ther
Am 16.01.2008 um 05:29 schrieb Michael Koziarski:
> parent controller. Consistency is great, but are there features that
> are easier with this?
>
> For example, are there any changes for plugin authors? Does this
> make *something* they do any easier?
This actually would make authoring plugin
On 1/14/08, Isak Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Line numbers are off compared to current trunk. I'm not sure if that
> matters for a one-liner + self contained test method, but could update
> the patch if desired.
>
Sorry, it seems I should have updated the patch for current edge.
It didn't
26 matches
Mail list logo
