Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't this be solved by having rack
return ordered hashes?
On 6-Aug-09, at 11:06 PM, andy wrote:
> The problem is that rack loses this ordering information, and I'm
> pretty much convinced that it can't be made to keep it.
--~--~-~--~~~
Thanks for your comments, John.
Re the need for changing the parameter parser to achieve #1, I think
it's absolutely necessary. I'm pretty convinced that the existing
parser is simply incapable of retaining ordering of record structures
unless those record structures are populated via *identical*
Hi Andy,
I have in the past built an extension to the form_for helper family to
accept a :element_id_prefix option that handles the "multiple html elements
with the same ID" problem. It's been sitting on my to-do list for awhile to
convert it to a rails patch and submit it for consideration.
I l
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Nate W wrote:
>
>> > 2) Any AR changes in the works that would affect this?
>>
>> Yes, but in a postive way. Miloops' ARel branch at least centralizes
>> all the query generation, hopefully you can leverage some of the
>> tidying he's done to get a head start on
> > 2) Any AR changes in the works that would affect this?
>
> Yes, but in a postive way. Miloops' ARel branch at least centralizes
> all the query generation, hopefully you can leverage some of the
> tidying he's done to get a head start on your work.
Cool, I spoke with miloops via email about
I've got a slightly modified form of this working.
The rules for parameter names in my scheme are:
- may optionally begin with an unbracketed name
- thereafter must be a sequence of bracketed names
- any bracketed name starting with '.' must be immediately followed by
one that does not
- the who
Looks like the ability to add prerelease versions using letters was
added in Rubygems version 1.3.2:
http://www.mail-archive.com/rubygems-develop...@rubyforge.org/msg02701.html
On Aug 7, 9:17 am, Geoff Buesing wrote:
> I had this problem; fixed it by upgrading to the latest
> Rubygems:https:/
I had this problem; fixed it by upgrading to the latest Rubygems:
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/2880-malformed-version-number-string-30pre
On Aug 7, 2:47 am, Hongli Lai wrote:
> On Aug 6, 12:39 pm, Eloy Duran wrote:
>
> > I was actually talking about this in my last em
I just recently wrote my own to get exact results for everything minus
the seconds for timing purposes in some logging. So your plugin with
:except would have likely done the trick for me.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Ryan Angilly wrote:
> lol @ "as per usual" How jaded we've all become. :)
lol @ "as per usual" How jaded we've all become. :)
I would use this. I've built things like this a few times, and there's
always the case where I screw up and get "1 hours" (wrong pluralization) or
"80 seconds" (instead of 1 minute 20 sec). Be nice to standardize going
forward.
On Fri, Aug
On Aug 6, 12:39 pm, Eloy Duran wrote:
> I was actually talking about this in my last email.
I'm experiencing this as well.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this
Oh yeah, and if a value is 0 it won't show it either.
2009/8/7 Ryan Bigg (Radar)
> This is why I gave you :except options, so you can get 2 years, 6 months,
> for example.
>
> 2009/8/7 Jason King
>
>
>> I wouldn't mind "about 2 and a half years" for the example in Ryan's
>> original, For the r
12 matches
Mail list logo
