| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| * | Do not create useless database transaction when building `has_one` association. | Bogdan Gusiev | 2012-11-10 | 1 | -1/+9 |
| | | |||||
| * | Fix grammar | Jo Liss | 2012-08-30 | 1 | -3/+3 |
| | | |||||
| * | move dependency logic out of generated methods | Jon Leighton | 2012-08-10 | 1 | -0/+18 |
| | | |||||
| * | Fix #7191. Remove unnecessary transaction when assigning has_one associations. | kennyj | 2012-08-08 | 1 | -13/+15 |
| | | |||||
| * | removes usage of Object#in? from the code base (the method remains defined ↵ | Xavier Noria | 2012-08-06 | 1 | -9/+12 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. | ||||
| * | load active_support/core_ext/object/inclusion in active_support/rails | Xavier Noria | 2012-08-02 | 1 | -1/+0 |
| | | |||||
| * | Deprecate update_column in favor of update_columns. | Rafael Mendonça França | 2012-07-24 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | Closes #1190 | ||||
| * | Remove update_attribute. | Steve Klabnik | 2012-06-14 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Historically, update_attribute and update_attributes are similar, but with one big difference: update_attribute does not run validations. These two methods are really easy to confuse given their similar names. Therefore, update_attribute is being removed in favor of update_column. See the thread on rails-core here: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/rubyonrails-core/BWPUTK7WvYA | ||||
| * | Only call set_owner_attributes for has_one association if target exists. | Dieter Komendera | 2011-07-04 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | When you add a record to a polymorphic has_one, you should be able to access ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-06-08 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | the owner from the associated record | ||||
| * | Don't remove the target if it has already been destroyed | Andrew White | 2011-05-11 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | Remove `#among?` from Active Support | Prem Sichanugrist | 2011-04-13 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | | | 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?`. | ||||
| * | Change Object#either? to Object#among? -- thanks to @jamesarosen for the ↵ | David Heinemeier Hansson | 2011-04-12 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | suggestion! | ||||
| * | Using Object#in? and Object#either? in various places | Prem Sichanugrist | 2011-04-11 | 1 | -1/+3 |
| | | | | | 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?. | ||||
| * | Move the code which builds a scope for through associations into a generic ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-03-10 | 1 | -6/+0 |
| | | | | | AssociationScope class which is capable of building a scope for any association. | ||||
| * | Use proper objects to do the work to build the associations (adding methods, ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-02-21 | 1 | -4/+15 |
| | | | | | callbacks etc) rather than calling a whole bunch of methods with rather long names. | ||||
| * | Delegate Association#options to the reflection, and replace ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-02-21 | 1 | -2/+2 |
| | | | | | 'reflection.options' with 'options'. Also add through_options and source_options methods for through associations. | ||||
| * | Singular associations no longer use a proxy, so no need to check for the ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-02-21 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | proxy type on assignment. | ||||
| * | Associations - where possible, call attributes methods rather than directly ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-02-21 | 1 | -13/+13 |
| | | | | | accessing the instance variables | ||||
| * | Let's be less blasé about method visibility on association proxies | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-30 | 1 | -1/+4 |
| | | |||||
| * | find_target can also go into SingularAssociation | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-16 | 1 | -4/+0 |
| | | |||||
| * | Abstract a bit more into SingularAssociation | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-16 | 1 | -2/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | Use self.target= rather than @target= as the former automatically sets loaded | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-16 | 1 | -2/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | Abstract common code from BelongsToAssociation and HasOneAssociation into ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-16 | 1 | -18/+5 |
| | | | | | SingularAssociation | ||||
| * | Support for create_association! for has_one associations | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-11 | 1 | -1/+4 |
| | | |||||
| * | When assigning a has_one, if anything fails, the assignment should be rolled ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-11 | 1 | -19/+23 |
| | | | | | back entirely | ||||
| * | When assigning a has_one, if the new record fails to save, raise an error | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-11 | 1 | -3/+3 |
| | | |||||
| * | When assigning a has_one, if the existing record fails to be removed from ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-11 | 1 | -5/+11 |
| | | | | | the association, raise an error | ||||
| * | has_one should always remove the old record (properly), even if not saving ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-11 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | the new record, so we don't get the database into a pickle | ||||
| * | Refactor HasOneAssociation#replace | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -26/+22 |
| | | |||||
| * | Don't not remove double negatives | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -4/+4 |
| | | |||||
| * | Clean up create, create! and build in HasOneAssociation | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -14/+8 |
| | | |||||
| * | merge_with_conditions is not necessary because the conditions will already ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -9/+0 |
| | | | | | be in the scope_for_create hash in the scope | ||||
| * | Not really worth having the HasAssociation module for just a single method | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -2/+0 |
| | | |||||
| * | Construct an actual ActiveRecord::Relation object for the association scope, ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-07 | 1 | -11/+3 |
| | | | | | rather than a hash which is passed to apply_finder_options. This allows more flexibility in how the scope is created, for example because scope.where(a, b) and scope.where(a).where(b) mean different things. | ||||
| * | Remove undocumented feature from has_one where you could pass false as the ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-03 | 1 | -20/+8 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | second parameter to build_assoc or create_assoc, and the existing associated object would be untouched (the foreign key would not be nullified, and it would not be deleted). If you want behaviour similar to this you can do the following things: * Use :dependent => :nullify (or don't specify :dependent) if you want to prevent the existing associated object from being deleted * Use has_many if you actually want multiple associated objects * Explicitly set the foreign key if, for some reason, you really need to have multiple objects associated with the same has_one. E.g. previous = obj.assoc obj.create_assoc previous.update_attributes(:obj_id => obj.id) | ||||
| * | Create the association scope directly rather than going through with_scope | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-03 | 1 | -2/+2 |
| | | |||||
| * | Use the association directly in other places too | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-03 | 1 | -11/+9 |
| | | |||||
| * | Allow assignment on has_one :through where the owner is a new record [#5137 ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2011-01-03 | 1 | -3/+1 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | state:resolved] This required changing the code to keep the association proxy for a belongs_to around, despite its target being nil. Which in turn required various changes to the way that stale target checking is handled, in order to support various edge cases (loaded target is nil then foreign key added, foreign key is changed and then changed back, etc). A side effect is that the code is nicer and more succinct. Note that I am removing test_no_unexpected_aliasing since that is basically checking that the proxy for a belongs_to *does* change, which is the exact opposite of the intention of this commit. Also adding various tests for various edge cases and related things. Phew, long commit message! | ||||
| * | Rename AssociationReflection#primary_key_name to foreign_key, since the ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-31 | 1 | -3/+3 |
| | | | | | options key which it relates to is :foreign_key | ||||
| * | And owner_quoted_id can go too | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-31 | 1 | -9/+0 |
| | | |||||
| * | Refactor we_can_set_the_inverse_on_this? to use a less bizarre name amongst ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-26 | 1 | -8/+3 |
| | | | | | other things | ||||
| * | Add a HasAssociation module for common code for has_* associations | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-26 | 1 | -0/+2 |
| | | |||||
| * | Remove AssociationProxy#dependent? - it's badly named and only used in one place | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-26 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | Associations: DRY up the code which is generating conditions, and make it ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2010-12-26 | 1 | -14/+3 |
| | | | | | all use arel rather than SQL strings | ||||
| * | using arel to compile sql statements | Aaron Patterson | 2010-12-25 | 1 | -1/+2 |
| | | |||||
| * | Partialy revert f1c13b0dd7b22b5f6289ca1a09f1d7a8c7c8584b | José Valim | 2010-11-28 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | |||||
| * | use persisted? instead of new_record? wherever possible | David Chelimsky | 2010-11-09 | 1 | -6/+6 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | - persisted? is the API defined in ActiveModel - makes it easier for extension libraries to conform to ActiveModel APIs without concern for whether the extended object is specifically ActiveRecord [#5927 state:committed] Signed-off-by: Santiago Pastorino <santiago@wyeworks.com> | ||||
| * | Refactoring: replace the mix of variables like @finder_sql, @counter_sql, ↵ | Jon Leighton | 2010-10-30 | 1 | -23/+16 |
| | | | | | etc with just a single scope hash (created on initialization of the proxy). This is now used consistently across all associations. Therefore, all you have to do to ensure finding/counting etc is done correctly is implement the scope correctly. | ||||
| * | dry up the hash dup and avoid sending nil values | Aaron Patterson | 2010-08-11 | 1 | -7/+7 |
| | | |||||
 |
index : rails.git | |
| Mirror of official rails repo with custom fixes. | Harald Eilertsen |
| aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats |