I can do this code:
params.require(:something).permit(:param_a,:param_b)
And this:
params.require(:something).permit(:param_a,:param_c_attributes:[])
My problem is that I need to select the permit parameters depending if some parameter exists. So I tried:
premit_params = {:param_a,:param_c_attributes:[]}
premit_params = {:param_a,:param_d} if params[:something] && params[:something][:param_d]
params.require(:something).permit(premit_params)
But it's not working.
BTW: Using Rails 5.1
It doesn't work because permit doesn't expect a hash as an argument, but a list of parameters.
Collect your arguments in an array and split that array with the splat operator (*) to list or arguments:
premit_params = [:param_a, { :param_c_attributes: [] }]
premit_params = [:param_a, :param_d] if params.dig(:something, :param_d)
params.require(:something).permit(*premit_params)
You can check if the parameter you want exits
For Example:
if (user_params.has_key?(:name))
end
Moreover, parameters are saved in hash so you have different methods you can use to apply your logic
https://ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Hash.html
Related
I want to mock this function:
def self.set_segment_info(segment_info, history_record)
history_record.segment_info = segment_info
end
In my test, I want a mock that only confirms that I called set_segment_info with an expected value. I don't care about what I pass in for history_record.
How would I do this? I tried
SegmentHistoryRecord.expects(:set_segment_info).with(:segment_info => expected_segment_info, :history_record => anything)
But that doesn't work.
I ran into this today and ended up doing something like:
SegmentHistoryRecord.expects(:set_segment_info).with(
expected_segment_info,
anything
)
I find it more readable that the do version and it helped me avoid a rubocop issue with too many parameters.
Here's an implementation where, if your function takes a lot of parameters, it's more convenient to specify a value for just the one you care about, instead of for all of them:
expected_segment_info = # ...
SegmentHistoryRecord.expects(:set_segment_info).with() { |actual_parameters| actual_parameters[:segment_info] == expected_segment_info }
(Where, as in the original question, set_segment_info is the function being mocked, and segment_info is the parameter whose value you want to match. Note that the history_record parameter -- and any others that might be present -- don't need to be included.)
SegmentHistoryRecord.expects(:set_segment_info).with() do |param1, param2|
# change below to your verification for :segment_info
# and leave param2 doing nothing, the expectation will ignore param2
param1 == expected_segment_info
end
I have a custom gem which creates a AR query with input that comes from an elasticsearch instance.
# record_ids: are the returned ids of the ES results
# order: is the order of the of the ids that ES returns
search_class.where(search_class.primary_key => record_ids).order(order)
Right now the implementation is that I build the order string directly into the order variable so it looks like this: ["\"positions\".\"id\" = 'fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7' DESC"]
This works fine but throws a deprecation warning which ultimately will not work in rails6.
DEPRECATION WARNING: Dangerous query method (method whose arguments are used as raw SQL) called with non-attribute argument(s): "\"positions\".\"id\" = 'fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7' DESC". Non-attribute arguments will be disallowed in Rails 6.0. This method should not be called with user-provided values, such as request parameters or model attributes. Known-safe values can be passed by wrapping them in Arel.sql()
So I tried couple of different approaches but all of them with no success.
order = ["\"positions\".\"id\" = 'fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7' DESC"]
# Does not work since order is an array
.order(Arel.sql(order))
# No errors but only returns an ActiveRecord_Relation
# on .inspect it returns `PG::SyntaxError: ERROR: syntax error at or near "["`
.order(Arel.sql("#{order}"))
# .to_sql: ORDER BY [\"\\\"positions\\\".\\\"id\\\" = 'fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7' DESC\"]"
order = ['fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7', ...]
# Won't work since its only for integer values
.order("idx(ARRAY#{order}, #{search_class.primary_key})")
# .to_sql ORDER BY idx(ARRAY[\"fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7\", ...], id)
# Only returns an ActiveRecord_Relation
# on .inspect it returns `PG::InFailedSqlTransaction: ERROR:`
.order("array_position(ARRAY#{order}, #{search_class.primary_key})")
# .to_sql : ORDER BY array_position(ARRAY[\"fcdc924a-21da-440e-8d20-eec9a71321a7\", ...], id)
I am sort of stuck since rails forces attribute arguments in the future and an has no option to opt out of this. Since the order is a code generated array and I have full control of the values I am curious how I can implement this. Maybe someone had this issue before an give some useful insight or idea?
You could try to apply Arel.sql to the elements of the array, that should work, ie
search_class.where(search_class.primary_key => record_ids)
.order(order.map {|i| i.is_a?(String) ? Arel.sql(i) : i})
How do I create an object if one is not found? This is the query I was running:
#event_object = #event_entry.event_objects.find_all_by_plantype('dog')
and I was trying this:
#event_object = EventObject.new unless #event_entry.event_objects.find_all_by_plantype('dog')
but that does not seem to work. I know I'm missing something very simple like normal :( Thanks for any help!!! :)
find_all style methods return an array of matching records. That is an empty array if no matching records are found. And an empty is truthy. Which means:
arr = []
if arr
puts 'arr is considered turthy!' # this line will execute
end
Also, the dynamic finder methods (like find_by_whatever) are officially depreacted So you shouldn't be using them.
You probably want something more like:
#event_object = #event_entry.event_objects.where(plantype: 'dog').first || EventObject.new
But you can also configure the event object better, since you obviously want it to belong to #event_entry.
#event_object = #event_entry.event_objects.where(plantype: 'dog').first
#event_object ||= #event_entry.event_objects.build(plantype: dog)
In this last example, we try to find an existing object by getting an array of matching records and asking for the first item. If there are no items, #event_object will be nil.
Then we use the ||= operator that says "assign the value on the right if this is currently set to a falsy value". And nil is falsy. So if it's nil we can build the object form the association it should belong to. And we can preset it's attributes while we are at it.
Why not use built in query methods like find_or_create_by or find_or_initialize_by
#event_object = #event_entry.event_objects.find_or_create_by(plantype:'dog')
This will find an #event_entry.event_object with plantype = 'dog' if one does not exist it will then create one instead.
find_or_initialize_by is probably more what you want as it will leave #event_object in an unsaved state with just the association and plantype set
#event_object = #event_entry.event_objects.find_or_initialize_by(plantype:'dog')
This assumes you are looking for a single event_object as it will return the first one it finds with plantype = 'dog'. If more than 1 event_object can have the plantype ='dog' within the #event_entry scope then this might not be the best solution but it seems to fit with your description.
Probably really easy but im having trouble finding documentation online about this
I have two activerecord queries in Ruby that i want to join together via an OR operator
#pro = Project.where(:manager_user_id => current_user.id )
#proa = Project.where(:account_manager => current_user.id)
im new to ruby but tried this myself using ||
#pro = Project.where(:manager_user_id => current_user.id || :account_manager => current_user.id)
this didnt work, So 1. id like to know how to actually do this in Ruby and 2. if that person can also give me a heads up on the boolean syntax in a ruby statement like this altogether.
e.g. AND,OR,XOR...
You can't use the Hash syntax in this case.
Project.where("manager_user_id = ? OR account_manager = ?", current_user.id, current_user.id)
You should take a look at the API documentation and follow conventions, too. In this case for the code that you might send to the where method.
This should work:
#projects = Project.where("manager_user_id = '#{current_user.id}' or account_manager_id = '#{current_user.id}'")
This should be safe since I'm assuming current_user's id value comes from your own app and not from an external source such as form submissions. If you are using form submitted data that you intent to use in your queries you should use placeholders so that Rails creates properly escaped SQL.
# with placeholders
#projects = Project.where(["manager_user_id = ? or account_manager_id = ?", some_value_from_form1, some_value_from_form_2])
When you pass multiple parameters to the where method (the example with placeholders), the first parameter will be treated by Rails as a template for the SQL. The remaining elements in the array will be replaced at runtime by the number of placeholders (?) you use in the first element, which is the template.
Metawhere can do OR operations, plus a lot of other nifty things.
I know compact() is a standard php function. And set() is a cake-specific method.
I am running a simple test of passing a value to a view generated with ajax (user render() in my controller), and it only passes the value from the controller to the view if my setup is like so:
$variable_name_to_pass = "Passing to the view using set() can compact()";
$this->set(compact('variable_name_to_pass'));
From reading the manual, it appears set() should work along w/out compact.
Can anyone explain why set() will not work alone? Like
$this->set('variable_name_to_pass');
According to the CakePHP API:
Parameters:
mixed $one required
A string or an array of data.
mixed $two optional NULL
Value in case $one is a string (which then works as the key). Unused if $one is an associative array, otherwise serves as the values to $one's keys.
The compact function returns an associative array, built by taking the names specified in the input array, using them as keys, and taking the values of the variables referenced by those names and making those the values. For example:
$fred = 'Fred Flinstone';
$barney = 'Barney Rubble';
$names = compact('fred', 'barney');
// $names == array('fred' => 'Fred Flinstone', 'barney' => 'Barney Rubble')
So when you use compact in conjunction with set, you're using the single parameter form of the set function, by passing it an associative array of key-value pairs.
If you just have one variable you want to set on the view, and you want to use the single parameter form, you must invoke set in the same way:
$variable_to_pass = 'Fred';
$this->set(compact('variable_to_pass'));
Otherwise, the two parameter form of set can be used:
$variable_to_pass = 'Fred';
$this->set('variable_to_pass', $variable_to_pass);
Both achieve the same thing.
Compact returns an array. So, apparently set is checking it's parameters and if it's an array. It knows that it's from compact. If not it expects another parameter, the value of variable.