| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
... | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
assignment
For one-to-one nested associations, if you build the new (in-memory)
child object yourself before assignment, then the NestedAttributes
module will not overwrite it, e.g.:
class Member < ActiveRecord::Base
has_one :avatar
accepts_nested_attributes_for :avatar
def avatar
super || build_avatar(width: 200)
end
end
member = Member.new
member.avatar_attributes = {icon: 'sad'}
member.avatar.width # => 200
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
guides/source/action_mailer_basics.md
|
| | |
|
|\ \
| |/
|/| |
Association with inverse_of does not set the parent in association building block
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This fixes inconsistency when building children of association
which has inverse_of set properly.
When creating new association object with a block:
parent.association.build do |child|
child.parent.equal?(parent) # false
end
So the block the `child.parent` did not point to the same object.
But when the object is created it points to same instance:
child = parent.association.build
child.parent.equal?(parent) # true
|
|\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Conflicts:
activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/abstract/schema_statements.rb
activerecord/test/cases/adapter_test.rb
guides/source/testing.md
[ci skip]
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|/| |
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes #8265
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
actionpack/lib/action_controller/metal/mime_responds.rb
activerecord/lib/active_record/attribute_methods.rb
guides/source/working_with_javascript_in_rails.md
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|/
|
|
| |
It's sometimes hard to quickly find where deprecated call was performed, especially in case of migrating between Rails versions. So this is an attempt to improve the call stack part of the warning message by providing caller explicitly.
|
|
|
|
| |
65843e1acc0c8d285ff79f8c9c49d4d1215440be
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
by Active Support)
Selecting which key extensions to include in active_support/rails
made apparent the systematic usage of Object#in? in the code base.
After some discussion in
https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/5ea6b0df9a36d033f21b52049426257a4637028d
we decided to remove it and use plain Ruby, which seems enough
for this particular idiom.
In this commit the refactor has been made case by case. Sometimes
include? is the natural alternative, others a simple || is the
way you actually spell the condition in your head, others a case
statement seems more appropriate. I have chosen the one I liked
the most in each case.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 3803fcce26b837c0117f7d278b83c366dc4ed370.
Conflicts:
activerecord/CHANGELOG.md
It will be deprecated only in 4.0, and removed properly in 4.1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It doesn't serve much purpose now that ActiveRecord::Base.all returns a
Relation.
The code is moved to active_record_deprecated_finders.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
* Remove unused association_class method.
* Remove a unnecessary assignment.
* Move @updated to BelongsToAssociation that only reference this instance variable.
* Reset @stale_state at the reset method. I think this place is right place.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
builder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This apparently fix the warning related to @new_record variable not
being initialized in AR's test suit, when an association is built and
the object is marshalled/loaded.
See these tests in AR's base_test.rb:
test_marshalling_with_associations
test_marshalling_new_record_round_trip_with_associations
Closes #3720.
|
|
|
|
| |
strict mass assignment sanitizer, fixed build_record to not merge creation_attributes, removed failing nested attributes tests (that feature was broken anyway) #4051
|
|
|
|
| |
object. Fixes a regression from 3.0.x
|
|
|
|
| |
Module#delegate previously ignored method visibility.
|
|
|
|
| |
performance gain for cases where the association is never used to load the target, for example with preloading. Related: #1873.
|
|
|
|
| |
before_initialize callback of the record runs. Fixes #1842.
|
|
|
|
| |
owner has been saved. Fixes #1524.
|
|
|
|
| |
the owner from the associated record
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After a long list of discussion about the performance problem from using varargs and the reason that we can't find a great pair for it, it would be best to remove support for it for now.
It will come back if we can find a good pair for it. For now, Bon Voyage, `#among?`.
|
|
|
|
| |
suggestion!
|
|
|
|
| |
There're a lot of places in Rails source code which make a lot of sense to switching to Object#in? or Object#either? instead of using [].include?.
|
|
|
|
| |
AssociationScope class which is capable of building a scope for any association.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
identity map is turned off
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
'reflection.options' with 'options'. Also add through_options and source_options methods for through associations.
|
|
|
|
| |
accessing the instance variables
|
| |
|