I have Googled my fingers sore, and I can't see anyone discussing this, but I have a suspicion that Laravels syncWithoutDetaching() method doesn't take any parameters for extra data like save(), sync() and attach() does?
Does anybody know this? In the API documentation the method has the following parameters:
array syncWithoutDetaching(Collection|Model|array $ids)
I have trouble adding existing data to a relationship between a Guest and an Event. I need to add status for the guests and what event they are attending, maybe attending or declined.
sync() and syncWithoutDetaching() both don't have a parameter for additional values, you have to pass the additional values as an array with the ids.
According to the docs:
You may also pass additional intermediate table values with the IDs:
$user->roles()->sync([
1 => ['expires' => true],
2,
3
]);
If you look here you can see that syncWithoutDetaching() just calls sync() but passes false as the second argument.
In your case it would be something like this:
$event->guests()->syncWithoutDetaching([
1 => ['attending' => true],
2 => ['attending' => false]
])
I think #remul answer is the best, but it requires additions for people like me who get to this page.
syncWithoutDetaching() - is just an abbreviation for sync() - here. This corresponds to sync($data, false)
The documentation talks about another great method:
If you would like to insert the same intermediate table values with
each of the synced model IDs, you may use the syncWithPivotValues
method
But the documentation does not say that the method accepts the third argument, which just corresponds to the logic of syncWithoutDetaching().
Look here.
If you pass false, the IDs not passed will not be detaching.
I think this is what the question was about.
Related
I've come across two different ways of inserting records into the database, the first being:
Model::create([
'field1' => $request['field1'],
'field2' => $request['field2']
]);
and the second way:
$model = new Model;
$model->field1 = $request['field1'];
$model->field2 = $request['field2'];
$model->save();
What is the difference between these two? Are they the same? When should I use one over the other?
Both do the same thing. See the create method code and you will understand. It's just a shorthand.
Sometimes I don't use the create method, for example when I need to set different values upon some condition.
I know this has already been answered. What I've noticed to be the main difference in both are these.
Both does the same thing. It "Saves" data. But create required you to have $fillable in your model. Without defining fillable fields, create will not work. The data will not be passed.
However, Save on the other hand, does not 'require' fillable and can store the data in to the table.
Hope someone else finds this helpful. Happy Coding :)
Good Evening Devs,
I'm trying to skip the first index of the array while applying validation rule and this is what I tried so far
$validatedData = Validator::make($request->all(),([
'inventories.0' => 'bail',
'inventories' => 'required|array|filled',
'quantities.0' => 'bail',
'quantities.*' => 'required|array|filled',
'required.0' => 'bail',
'required.*' => 'required|array|filled',
]));
But it's not working, any ideas?
I'm trying to add multiple dynamic fields, but want to skip the first index of it.
Please review the picture given below to get the clear picture of the problem.
try this:
$validatedData = Validator::make($request->except(['inventories[0],quantities[0],required[0]']),([
'inventories.*' => 'required|array|filled',
'quantities.*' => 'required|array|filled',
'required.*' => 'required|array|filled',
]));
Bail is not used for skipping an entry. But it may be used for skipping validation logic.
for example,
'phone' => 'bail|numeric|unique:users'
In this case, if somehow the entered phone number is not numeric, it will not check the third validation (i.e. whether the phone number is unique in 'users' table or not).
For your case, you should not use "$request->all()". You should use "request()->except(['inventories[0], quantities[0], required[0]'])" instead
This is perhaps, not the best practice. You're trying to allow the presentation layer to have a direct influence over the data / logic layer of your application. It would probably be better to only send over the data you want to validate rather than sending over everything and they tying to get your validation (and other logic) to ignore the first array element.
Is it an api call or a standard web form you are submitting? If it is an api call, can you not build up your data of only the rows you want to send over, before you make the call?
This will keep your logic layer much cleaner, and allow you to change the ui much easier without affecting the logic, and it being tightly coupled.
Just a suggestion.
My request looks like this
Array
(
[name] => Eugene A
[address] => Array
(
[billing] => Array
(
[address] => aaa
)
[shipping] => Array
(
[address] => bbb
)
)
)
I need to delete the shipping address. But how?
I can only delete both addresses,
$request->request->remove('address');
but I don't want it.
I want to delete only shipping address, like so
$request->request->remove('address.shipping');
But it is not working for me
Laravel 5.6
Update
Why do I need it?
Easy. I have abstracted out my Form Request validation into a class that is a child to Illuminate\Foundation\Http\FormRequest.
I actually have few classes for validation. I call them one by one in a controller like so:
app()->make(CustomerPostRequest::class); // validate Customer information
app()->make(AddressSaveRequest::class); // validate Addresses
Why?
Now I can Mock this requests in unit-tests, and I can have my validation abstracted out. And I can use Address validation in many places.
But Now I need more flexibility. Why?
Because AddressSaveRequest rule looks like this
public function rules(): array
{
return [
'address.*.address' => [
'bail',
'required',
'string',
],
...
It validates all addresses.
But sometimes I don't want to validate shipping address, if the the chech_box - ship_to_the_same_address is ticked.
But I have my Address validator abstracted in separate file and it is used in many places. There are places where ship_to_the_same_address tick box is not presented.
Thus I cannot use 'required_unless:ship_to_same_address,yes',
And I cannot use
app()->makeWith(AddressSaveRequest::class, ['ship_to_the_same_address ' => 'yes']);
Because Taylor said ...when calling makeWith. In my opinion it should make a new instance each time this method is called because the given parameter array is dynamic.. And it does, and it does not work correctly with app()->instance(AddressSaveRequest::class, $addressSaveRequest); and cannot be mocked in unit tests.
Why Taylor decided it - I seriously don't know.
PS
And yes, I know that mocking requests is not recommended.
If you were trying to add or remove inputs from the Request itself:
You can add data to the request pretty easily by merging it in and letting Laravel handle which data source is being used:
$request->merge(['input' => 'value']);
That will merge in the input named input into the input source for the Request.
For removing inputs you could try to replace all the inputs without that particular input in the replacement:
$request->replace($request->except('address.shipping'));
Just one idea to try.
Try this:
$request->except(['address.shipping']);
Details: Laravel Request
Laravel has a helper method called array_forget, which does exactly what it sounds like:
$requestArray = $request->all();
$newArray = array_forget($requestArray, 'address.shipping')
Documentation
After the edit to the main question with why some inputs of the request are to be deleted, my main answer isn't correct anymore. User Lagbox has the correct answer for the question that was asked.
However, I would like to note that another solution would be to have seperate Request classes with validation. One for placing an order (assuming it is a system where someone can order stuff) where ship_to_same_address is present and another one for things like updating your account, like PlaceOrderRequest and UpdateAccountRequest classes.
Sorry about that title, wasn't too sure how I could word it.
In a sinatra web app using datamapper, I am returning an array of instances of a model (named Polls) like so:
user.new_polls.to_json(:relationships => {:options => {:methods => [:votes]}})
Each Poll has many Options, each option has many Votes.
How would I be able to return the options in its respective poll, in order of descending votes?
Thank you.
You can create a method in your Poll model, called options_sorted_by_votes (or something similar) and then use
user.new_polls.to_json(:relationships => {:options_sorted_by_votes => {:methods => [:votes]}})
I am using the SoftDeletableBehavior for my addresses model.
This sets it so when you delete an address it doesnt really delete it, instead sets a deleted column in the database to 1.
This also changes your query in the beforeFind function of the Address model to only pull entries where deleted != 1
This works when I am viewing addresses via the addresses controller like /addresses/show/43.
However my Users controller hasMany addresses. So when I am in the users controller and I call $this->find('first'); To get the user, I also get the associated addresses. I am expecting this to NOT give me the (softly) deleted addresses but it DOES. The beforeFilter on the Address Model is never called either.
What is the right way to handle this?
Update.
Apparently when I do this:
$data = $this->User->find('first',array('conditions' => array('User.id' => $id),'recursive' => 2));
I have a $data['User] array and a $data['Address] array (along with others).
But this does not use the beforeFind filter in the Address Model. So I get the wrong data.
But if I do this:
$data = $this->User->find('first',array('conditions' => array('User.id' => $id),'recursive' => 2));
$data['Address'] = $this->User->Address->find('all',array('conditions'=>array('user_id'=>$id)));
Then it does use the beforeFind filter on the Address model and returns the right data.
(Of course in a different format [Address][0][id] vs [Address][0][Address][id])
What I do not understand is if the associated data thats pulled does not use its own model to find its data, then whats the point? Isn't this one of the main purposes of MVC?
Maybe I just don't understand? Or I am missing something?
Can someone please enlighten me?
Can't you put this condition in your association?
<?php
class User extends AppModel {
var $hasMany = array(
'Address' => array(
'conditions' => array('NOT' => array('Address.deleted' => '1')),
)
);
}
?>
Personally, I would add a condition to the find query for users
$this->Users->find->('all',array('conditions'=>array('Address.deleted !='=>'1')));
(haven't tested the code for exact syntax, but this is the general idea)
When you use $this->User->find(...) and include Addresses, you will only see the User model's callbacks fire, because that is the model you are using to drive the find.
This is why you have to use extra conditions in your User model's associations to filter out the soft-deleted Addresses.
If the Address model's callbacks were fired during every find on the User model when recursion scope included Addresses, you'd have no control as to when to include the soft-deleted Addresses and would risk clashes in functionality and param manipulation by those callbacks. Not to mention the serious performance impact this could have.