How can i define create method with variables and model in laravel? Like this:
public function createMethodName($variable, $variable2)
{
\App\ModelName::create([...]);
}
You have to just insert the passed variables in the array like:
// include model at the top of your file:
use \App\Models\ModelName;
public function createMethodName($variable1, $variable2)
{
$my_stuff = ModelName::create([
‘something’ => $variable1,
‘something_else’ => $variable2,
]);
}
Also, do not forget to make some of your Model fields fillable (fields which are included in the array) in your Model, if you want to save values to the table with using create(). Check the Reference about this:
https://laravel.com/docs/8.x/eloquent#mass-assignment
Short update:
Maybe I misunderstood your question a bit since according to your new comments under your question it is getting clearer that you maybe first would like to create a Table with Schema::create() method (which is a totally different part of the fun). Reference:
https://laravel.com/docs/8.x/migrations#creating-tables
Then after you created your Table, you can create a Model using artisan like:
php artisan make:model ModelName
Reference:
https://laravel.com/docs/8.x/eloquent#defining-models
and then you can use ModelName::create() method in your Controller as I gave it above to saving your data into your Table. So you should study these steps a bit more if it is the case.
Related
I am currently moving over from symfony to laravel, it's quite a bit different when it comes to the database. So i have a basic model, i'm just going to use an example:
class Test extends Model
{
use HasFactory;
}
All good, i have a migration and the table created. However, i don't like this:
$test = new Test();
$test->my_field = 'hello';
$test->save();
I don't like it because it's having to use a magic __set() to create the parameter, if i define the parameter in my model like this:
class Test extends Model
{
use HasFactory;
public ?string $my_field;
}
I get database errors when it tries to insert when i define the params like this. Why is that? It's doing the same thing as __set() but i'm actually physically defining them, which in my opinion is a better way to code it as my IDE can typehint and it's just nicer to follow the program knowing what params are there.
What's the reason for it inserting when i don't define them, and not when i do? From my actual table which is bookings , has a field booking_ref:
General error: 1364 Field 'booking_ref' doesn't have a default value (SQL: insert into booking_reviews (updated_at, created_at) values (2021-12-13 14:13:08, 2021-12-13 14:13:08))
This happens when i define the $booking_ref param on the model, but if i take it out and rely on the __set() method it works fine. Doesn't make any sense to me right now.
I think this is a reasonable enough misunderstanding to be useful to future visitors, so I want to try to explain what's going on with some pseudo-code and some references to the current source code.
You are correct that when setting a property on a Laravel model, that is a column in the DB, internally Laravel is using the PHP magic method __set.
What this does is allow you to 1) set properties directly instead of calling some kind of setter function, and 2) interact with your table columns without needing the boilerplate of column definitions in your model.
Where the assumptions go wrong is with what __set is doing. __set does not have to simply set an actual property with the same name. __set is just a method you may implement to do whatever you want. What you assumption implies is that it's doing something like this:
public function __set($key, $value)
{
$this->{$key} = $value;
}
However, you can do whatever you want with the $key and $value passed to the magic method.
What Laravel does is call another method defined in the HasAttributes trait - setAttribute.
public function __set($key, $value)
{
$this->setAttribute($key, $value);
}
setAttribute does a few extra things, but most importantly it adds the key/value pair to Model property $this->attributes[].
To hopefully help this difference make sense, here is what the two __set methods would yield with a basic example:
$model->my_column = 'value';
// 1st example
/**
* {
* public $my_column = 'value';
* }
*/
// Laravel way
/**
* {
* protected $attributes= ['my_column => 'value'];
* }
*/
I won't go through both saving and updating since they're very similar, but to show how this is used, we can look at the save method, which calls performInsert and after a few more calls makes it's way back to the attributes property to determine what to actually insert into the query.
Summary
Laravel does not use custom model properties when deciding what column/values to add to queries.
This is why when you create custom mutators, you interact with the attributes property just like Laravel does internally.
Anytime you introduce "magic" into code, you have some tradeoffs. In this case, that tradeoff is slightly less clarity with what database columns are actually available. However, like I mentioned in comments, there are other solutions to make models more IDE friendly like Laravel IDE helper.
As I understand, mutators change your attribute on save function (create or update). Can I make mutator just for atrribute display to users, but leave default values on save function ?
In Eloquent Model when you do this:
public function getSomeNameAttribute($value)
{
return ucfirst($value);
}
That ^ will mutate the value for showing it later in views and it won't affect what is stored in DB table.
And also if you use a setter setSomeNameAttribute($value) you can pull the actual value from db table with:
$model->getOriginal('attribute_name'); // Laravel V. ^5.*
or
$model->getRawOriginal('attribute_name'); // Laravel V. ^8.*
I am using Laravel Eloquent to retrieve data from the database.
I want to get the related data as an object not an array ( whats inside the texts table), so it is easier to work on the data on the blade file. This is my code I tried using first() but it doesn't work
Icon::with(["texts" => function($query) use ($language){
$query->where("language_id",$language->id)->first();
}, "texts.language"])->get();
How to Acheive it?
You could create an accessor function that provides a shorthand attribute to the required value.
In your Icon class:
public function getTextAttribute() {
// You'd only have to provide the $language somehow.
return $this->texts()->where('language_id', $language->id)->first();
}
Elsewhere, like in Blade, when you're using an Icon you can then use:
{{$icon->text}}
I trying to learn laravel and to do some tests/demo apps. I've struggling now with laravel/eloquent tables relations. And I need advice.
I have 3 models [Application, Term, AppState] and their tables applications[id, terms_id, appStates_id, and other cols ], terms[id, startDate, endDate, ...], app_states[id, caption]
Application.php
public function term()
{
return $this->belongsTo('App\Term');
}
public function appState()
{
return $this->belongsTo('App\AppState');
}
in Term.php and AppState.php i have:
public function applications()
{
return $this->hasMany('App\Application');
}
How I can get let's say "caption"/"startDay"+"endDate" in blade for each application? I can get their ids $app->terms_id/$app->appStates_id in foreach loop, but i want get caption value from app_states table.
Has to be this relations also specified in migrations? In some tuts is mentioned, that is not needed in case i want to handle it only in laravel.
Thanks for advice
You can access a model's relationship values by calling the relationship method like a property.
$application = Application::find(1);
$application->term->startDate;
$application->term->endDate;
$application->appState->caption;
Also your relationship with AppState is wrong, since your foreign key doesn't follow a snake_case typing, you'll need to provide the appropriate key for it
public function appState()
{
return $this->belongsTo('App\AppState', 'appStates_id');
}
You might also want to check terms_id as well since the model name (Term) is singular but the foreign key is plural.
Has to be this relations also specified in migrations? In some tuts is mentioned, that is not needed in case i want to handle it only in laravel.
Well, yes, you don't need to if Laravel will only be the one accessing that database. But if any cases in the near future you decide to migrate to a different framework or use the same database in another application, it's better to include these relationships in the migration. Also a database administrator would probably cringe if you don't.
So provided your relationships are correctly setup, you can access them anywhere you have an instance of that model.
So for example, lets say you have passed a collection of applications to your view ($apps):
#foreach($apps as $app)
{{ $app->term->startDate }}
{{ $app->term->endDate }}
{{ $app->appState->caption }}
#endforeach
Important Note: We are accessing the Eloquent relationship using ->appState rather than ->appState(). The later is actually accessing a Query Builder instance and has some more advanced use cases
I have a model that has a related model
class A extends Model{
public function niceName()
{
return this->hasOne('App\NiceName2' ...);
}
In the controller when I retrieve data with submodel the result is like
a[nice_name_2] (using the table name) and I would like it to be a[NiceName2].
Is there a way to have an alias for the returned result? In cakePHP i know there is propertyName to set this on relations. Laravel has a similar feature?
Thanks
Laravel uses the convention of camelCase for method names and snake_case for attributes. I'm not sure there's an easy way around this.
When Laravel serializes the data, it converts relationships to snake_case, by convention. So NiceName2 would become nice_name2 when you execute toArray() or when the model is serialized (either in a JSON response or otherwise).
How this works is:
When you access $model->nice_name2 it converts the property name back to niceName2 to check for a relationship method with that name. When serializing, it converts the relationship niceName2 to the attribute name nice_name2.