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.
Related
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.
I currently work on a project where the User creates Models, that only he/she is allowed to see, edit or delete.
The Create Part done by Eloquent Relationships, but for the other operations I would like to combine it with Route Model binding and not manually in the controller. I tried solving it with middlewares, but I couldn't access the Ressource.
Can somebody point me to the right Direction, any best Practices are welcome!
Personally I use route model binding, but only allow the model to bind if the user owns the record.
This means that no matter what - people can never access someone elses record. So for example, in my route I can do
$router->get('property/{property}, ['uses' => PropertyController#show]);
Then in my RouteServiceProvider:
$router->bind('property', function($value) {
$property = \App\Property::findOrFail($value);
if ((int)$property->user_id !== (int)auth()->id()) {
abort (404);
}
return $property;
});
So in the example above - we have a property route, and it will try and find the property record given. It will then check that the user owns the record, otherwise it throws a 404 (but you could just redirect or something - up to you).
I need to delete customer addresses programmatically, but I didn't find a function to do that.
$recordedAddresses = array();
foreach ($customer->getAddresses() as $address)
{
$recordedAddresses = $address->toArray();
}
I already took the addresses' collection as showed above, I just wanna delete them by id.
Curiously I didn't find examples but using API.
Could someone gimme a hand with that?
Somehow Magento keeps empty entities after using $address->delete() in my case. There were empty addresses on account preventing admin from saving the customer form when using this method.
Only way I've found to actually remove the address from user account is by changing the protected $_isDeleted flag to true:
$address = Mage::getModel('customer/address')->load($addressId);
$address->isDeleted(true);
Hope it saves some time for anyone who will stumble uppon same Magento behaviour.
Have a look at the Mage_Customer_AddressController controller class and deleteAction() method. Essentially all you need to is load the address by it's id:
$address = Mage::getModel('customer/address')->load($addressId);
and then delete it:
$address->delete();
delete() is a standard method you can run against all models (see Mage_Core_Model_Abstract), you can also set the _isDeleted flag and call save() which will have the same result.
I was just wondering what the best practice approach is for deciding where to create an action/view in certain situations.
If User hasMany Video
where is the best place to create the action/view to show user videos?
So within the Users account page 'My Videos' link do you
just create a users/my_videos action and view.
create videos/my_videos action and view.
or as is most likely you would already have a Controller/Action of videos/index which would have search functionality. Simply use this passing in a user id.
Any thoughts/advice greatly appreciated
Thanks
Leo
One potential option is to do the following:
Since the videos likely have much more code around them than a simple which user has which videos lookup the video list action should be in the VideosController.
In past projects I have (in CakePHP 1.3) used prefix routing to address some of this.
In config/core.php make sure you enable routing.prefixes to include a 'user' prefix.
<?php
... in routes.php ...
Routing.prefixes = array( 'user' );
?>
In the videos controller make an action with the following signature:
<?php
...
public function user_index( $userID = null ){
...
}
?>
and in the views where you link to the list of users videos the html::link call should look similar to the following:
<?php
...
echo $this->Html->link( 'User\'s Videos', array(
'controller' => 'videos',
'action' => 'index',
'prefix' => 'user',
$this->Session->read( 'Auth.User.id' )
));
?>
Of course this assumes you are using the Auth component here to track the logged in user. The Session helper code to read the authenticated user id might need tweaking.
This lets you a) Not worry too much about routing aside from enabling prefix routing and b) will quickly let you have pretty links like so -- site.com/user/videos/index/419
Couple this with some Slug love ( this is the best link for this I have seen - no slug field required on the db layer - http://42pixels.com/blog/slugs-ugly-bugs-pretty-urls )
You could even end up with urls like so quite easily: site.com/user/videos/index/eben-roux
and with just a tiny bit of editing to app/config/routes.php you could eliminate the /index/ portion and the results would be SEO friendly and user friendly in the format:
site.com/user/videos/eben-roux
http://book.cakephp.org/view/945/Routes-Configuration
As always with code you have the two extremes of:
1) Putting everything in a single controller
2) Having every action in a separate controller
The ideal approach will nearly always be somewhere between the two so how to decide what is grouped together and what is separated?
In MVC I tend to look at the Views and see what the commonalities are: as you point out Users have a ref to a collection of Videos in the Model, but would you want both sets of Data in any single View? i.e. In this example is it likely that you would be on a page that both managed user details, and displayed the list of vids? If not then I'd suggest separate controllers.
If either controller would then be extremely simple - e.g. one method, then may be worth considering merging the two.
I like to keeps things separate.
What I'd do is an index action in videos controller, passing user's id as argument and then displaying only current users video.
public function index($id = null){
$this->paginate = array( 'conditions'=> array('Video.user_id' => $id));
$this->set('videos', $this->paginate());
}
My take is that it depends on the responsibility you assign to the controllers.
I would say that something like a User or a Video controller should be concerned with only those entities.
You may want to consider something like a UserDashboard (or something similar but appropriately named) as alluded to by Dunhamzzz in the comments. This can aggegate all the functionality from an "entry" point-of-view. The same way a banner / shortcut / action menu would work.
Your UserDashboard would use whatever data layer / repository is required to get the relevant data (such as the IVideoRepository or IVideoQuery implementation).
Usually when something doesn't feel right it isn't. Try splitting it out and see how it works. You can alsways re-arrange / refactor again later.
Just a thought.
I don't think there's a 'one-rule-fits-all' solution to this question, but I would try to take an approach in which you would determine what the main object is that you're dealing with, and adding the action/view to that object's controller.
In your example I'd say that your main object is a video and that the action you're requiring is a list of video's filtered by a specific property (in this case the user's id, but this could very well be a category, a location, etc.).
One thing I would not do is let your desired URL determine in which controller you put your functionality. URLs are trivially changed with routes.
So, I'm not quite sure how I should structure this in CakePHP to work correctly in the proper MVC form.
Let's, for argument sake, say I have the following data structure which are related in various ways:
Team
Task
Equipment
This is generally how sites are and is quite easy to structure and make in Cake. For example, I would have the a model, controller and view for each item set.
My problem (and I'm sure countless others have had it and already solved it) is that I have a level above the item sets. So, for example:
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
In my site, I need the ability for someone to view the site at an individual group level as well as move to view it all together (ie, ignore the groups).
So, I have models, views and controls for Depart, Team, Task and Equipment.
How do I structure my site so that from the Department view, someone can select a Department then move around the site to the different views for Team/Task/Equipment showing only those that belong to that particular Department.
In this same format, is there a way to also move around ignoring the department associations?
Hopefully the following example URLs clarifies anything that was unclear:
// View items while disregarding which group-set record they belong to
http://www.example.com/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Equipment/action/id
http://www.example.com/Departments
// View items as if only those associated with the selected group-set record exist
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Equipment/action/id
Can I get the controllers to function in this manner? Is there someone to read so I can figure this out?
Thanks to those that read all this :)
I think I know what you're trying to do. Correct me if I'm wrong:
I built a project manager for myself in which I wanted the URLs to be more logical, so instead of using something like
http://domain.com/project/milestones/add/MyProjectName I could use
http://domain.com/project/MyProjectName/milestones/add
I added a custom route to the end (!important) of my routes so that it catches anything that's not already a route and treats it as a "variable route".
Router::connect('/project/:project/:controller/:action/*', array(), array('project' => '[a-zA-Z0-9\-]+'));
Whatever route you put means that you can't already (or ever) have a controller by that name, for that reason I consider it a good practice to use a singular word instead of a plural. (I have a Projects Controller, so I use "project" to avoid conflicting with it.)
Now, to access the :project parameter anywhere in my app, I use this function in my AppController:
function __currentProject(){
// Finding the current Project's Info
if(isset($this->params['project'])){
App::import('Model', 'Project');
$projectNames = new Project;
$projectNames->contain();
$projectInfo = $projectNames->find('first', array('conditions' => array('Project.slug' => $this->params['project'])));
$project_id = $projectInfo['Project']['id'];
$this->set('project_name_for_layout', $projectInfo['Project']['name']);
return $project_id;
}
}
And I utilize it in my other controllers:
function overview(){
$this->layout = 'project';
// Getting currentProject id from App Controller
$project_id = parent::__currentProject();
// Finding out what time it is and performing queries based on time.
$nowStamp = time();
$nowDate = date('Y-m-d H:i:s' , $nowStamp);
$twoWeeksFromNow = $nowDate + 1209600;
$lateMilestones = $this->Project->Milestone->find('all', array('conditions'=>array('Milestone.project_id' => $project_id, 'Milestone.complete'=> 0, 'Milestone.duedate <'=> $nowDate)));
$this->set(compact('lateMilestones'));
$currentProject = $this->Project->find('all', array('conditions'=>array('Project.slug' => $this->params['project'])));
$this->set(compact('currentProject'));
}
For your project you can try using a route like this at the end of your routes.php file:
Router::connect('/:groupname/:controller/:action/*', array(), array('groupname' => '[a-zA-Z0-9\-]+'));
// Notice I removed "/project" from the beginning. If you put the :groupname first, as I've done in the last example, then you only have one option for these custom url routes.
Then modify the other code to your needs.
If this is a public site, you may want to consider using named variables. This will allow you to define the group on the URL still, but without additional functionality requirements.
http://example.com/team/group:hr
http://example.com/team/action/group:hr/other:var
It may require custom routes too... but it should do the job.
http://book.cakephp.org/view/541/Named-parameters
http://book.cakephp.org/view/542/Defining-Routes
SESSIONS
Since web is stateless, you will need to use sessions (or cookies). The question you will need to ask yourself is how to reflect the selection (or not) of a specific department. It could be as simple as putting a drop down selection in the upper right that reflects ALL, HR, Sales, etc. When the drop down changes, it will set (or clear) the Group session variable.
As for the functionality in the controllers, you just check for the Session. If it is there, you limit the data by the select group. So you would use the same URLs, but the controller or model would manage how the data gets displayed.
// for all functionality use:
http://www.example.com/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Equipment/action/id
You don't change the URL to accommodate for the functionality. That would be like using a different URL for every USER wanting to see their ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER, or BILLING INFO. Where USER would be the group and ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER< and BILLING INFO would be the item sets.
WITHOUT SESSIONS
The other option would be to put the Group filter on each page. So for example on Team/index view you would have a group drop down to filter the data. It would accomplish the same thing without having to set and clear session variables.
The conclusion is and the key thing to remember is that the functionality does not change nor does the URLs. The only thing that changes is that you will be working with filtered data sets.
Does that make sense?