| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
| |
This autocorrects the violations after adding a custom cop in
3305c78dcd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
73e7aab behaved as expected on codeship, failing the build with
exactly these RuboCop violations. Hopefully `rubocop -a` will
have been enough to get a passing build!
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Follow up of #31432.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
```
rails/activerecord$ bundle exec rake postgresql:test --verbose TESTOPTS="--seed=36062"
Failure:
AssociationsJoinModelTest#test_has_many_through_polymorphic_has_one
[/home/travis/build/rails/rails/activerecord/test/cases/associations/join_model_test.rb:407]:
--- expected
+++ actual
@@ -1 +1 @@
-[
#<Tagging id: 1, tag_id: 1, super_tag_id: 2, taggable_type: "Post", taggable_id: 1, comment: nil>,
#<Tagging id: 2, tag_id: 1, super_tag_id: nil, taggable_type: "Post", taggable_id: 2, comment: nil>
]
+#<ActiveRecord::Associations::CollectionProxy [
#<Tagging id: 2, tag_id: 1, super_tag_id: nil, taggable_type: "Post", taggable_id: 2, comment: nil>,
#<Tagging id: 1, tag_id: 1, super_tag_id: 2, taggable_type: "Post", taggable_id: 1, comment: nil>
]>
```
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 3420a14590c0e6915d8b6c242887f74adb4120f9, reversing
changes made to afb66a5a598ce4ac74ad84b125a5abf046dcf5aa.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This change reverted in eac6f369 but it is needed for data integrity.
See #25328.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
mtsmfm/disable-referential-integrity-without-superuser-privilege-take-2"
This reverts commit c1faca6333abe4b938b98fedc8d1f47b88209ecf, reversing
changes made to 8c658a0ecc7f2b5fc015d424baf9edf6f3eb2b0b.
See https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/27636#issuecomment-297534129
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
privileges (take 2)
Re-create https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/21233
eeac6151a5 was reverted (127509c071b4) because it breaks tests.
----------------
ref: 72c1557254
- We must use `authors` fixture with `author_addresses` because of its foreign key constraint.
- Tests require PostgreSQL >= 9.4.2 because it had a bug about `ALTER CONSTRAINTS` and fixed in 9.4.2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
mtsmfm/disable-referential-integrity-without-superuser-privileges"
This reverts commit eeac6151a55cb7d5f799e1ae33aa64a839cbc3aa, reversing
changes made to 5c40239d3104543e70508360d27584a3e4dc5baf.
Reason: Broke the isolated tests.
https://travis-ci.org/rails/rails/builds/188721346
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
privileges
ref: 72c1557254
- We must use `authors` fixture with `author_addresses` because of its foreign key constraint.
- Tests require PostgreSQL >= 9.4.2 because it had a bug about `ALTER CONSTRAINTS` and fixed in 9.4.2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Currently if `CollectionProxy` has more than one new record,
`CollectionProxy#uniq` result is incorrect.
And `CollectionProxy#uniq` was aliased to `distinct` in a1bb6c8b06db.
But the `uniq` method and the `SELECT DISTINCT` method are different
methods. The doc in `CollectionProxy` is for the `SELECT DISTINCT`
method, not for the `uniq` method.
Therefore, reverting the alias in `CollectionProxy` to fix the
inconsistency and to have the both methods.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
assert [1, 3].includes?(2) fails with unhelpful "Asserting failed" message
assert_includes [1, 3], 2 fails with "Expected [1, 3] to include 2" which makes it easier to debug and more obvious what went wrong
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Style/SpaceBeforeBlockBraces
Style/SpaceInsideBlockBraces
Style/SpaceInsideHashLiteralBraces
Fix all violations in the repository.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The current code base is not uniform. After some discussion,
we have chosen to go with double quotes by default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Ruby 2.4 unifies Fixnum and Bignum into Integer: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12005
* Forward compat with new unified Integer class in Ruby 2.4+.
* Backward compat with separate Fixnum/Bignum in Ruby 2.2 & 2.3.
* Drops needless Fixnum distinction in docs, preferring Integer.
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
RochesterinNYC/better-error-message-for-includes-relations-missing
Improve error message for missing relations for includes and eager_load
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
relations
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
When the `source_type` option is passed to a has_many through, the
resulting `Reflection` will be an instance of `PolymorphicReflection`
and not `ThroughReflection`, meaning that it will ignore the scopes that
it needs to apply from the through reflections. This adds an additional
delegation call to remedy this. I've been finding the reflection code
completely impenetrable lately, it could use some major love.
Fixes #22726
|
|/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We deprecate the support for passing an argument to force reload in
6eae366d0d2e5d5211eeaf955f56bd1dc6836758. That led to several
deprecation warning when running Active Record test suite.
This commit silence the warnings by properly calling `#reload` on the
association proxy or on the association object instead. However, there
are several places that `ActiveSupport::Deprecation.silence` are used as
those tests actually tests the force reload functionality and will be
removed once `master` is targeted next minor release (5.1).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
See #9683 for the reasons we switched to `distinct`.
Here is the discussion that triggered the actual deprecation #20198.
`uniq`, `uniq!` and `uniq_value` are still around.
They will be removed in the next minor release after Rails 5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I’m renaming all instances of `use_transcational_fixtures` to
`use_transactional_tests` and “transactional fixtures” to
“transactional tests”.
I’m deprecating `use_transactional_fixtures=`. So anyone who is
explicitly setting this will get a warning telling them to use
`use_transactional_tests=` instead.
I’m maintaining backwards compatibility—both forms will work.
`use_transactional_tests` will check to see if
`use_transactional_fixtures` is set and use that, otherwise it will use
itself. But because `use_transactional_tests` is a class attribute
(created with `class_attribute`) this requires a little bit of hoop
jumping. The writer method that `class_attribute` generates defines a
new reader method that return the value being set. Which means we can’t
set the default of `true` using `use_transactional_tests=` as was done
previously because that won’t take into account anyone using
`use_transactional_fixtures`. Instead I defined the reader method
manually and it checks `use_transactional_fixtures`. If it was set then
it should be used, otherwise it should return the default, which is
`true`. If someone uses `use_transactional_tests=` then it will
overwrite the backwards-compatible method with whatever they set.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reliant on https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/15747 but pulled to a
separate PR to reduce noise. `has_many :through` associations have the
undocumented behavior of automatically detecting counter caches.
However, the way in which it does so is inconsistent with counter caches
everywhere else, and doesn't actually work consistently.
As with normal `has_many` associations, the user should specify the
counter cache on the `belongs_to`, if they'd like it updated.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The similarity of `Relation#uniq` to `Array#uniq` is confusing. Since our
Relation API is close to SQL terms I renamed `#uniq` to `#distinct`.
There is no deprecation. `#uniq` and `#uniq!` are aliases and will continue
to work. I also updated the documentation to promote the use of `#distinct`.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 637a7d9d357a0f3f725b0548282ca8c5e7d4af4a, reversing
changes made to 5937bd02dee112646469848d7fe8a8bfcef5b4c1.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
They don't add any benefits over `assert object.blank?`
and `assert object.present?`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If you create a new record via a collection association proxy that has
not loaded its target, and which selects additional attributes through
the association, then when the proxy loads its target, it will
inadvertently trigger an ActiveModel::MissingAttributeError during
attribute writing when CollectionAssociation#merge_target_lists attempts
to do its thing, since the newly loaded records will possess attributes
the created record does not.
This error also raises a bogus/confusing deprecation warning when
accessing the association in Rails 3.2.x, so cherry-pick would be
appreciated!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Method compilation provides better performance and I think the code
comes out cleaner as well.
A knock on effect is that methods that get redefined produce warnings. I
think this is a good thing. I had to deal with a bunch of warnings
coming from our tests, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It doesn't serve much purpose now that ActiveRecord::Base.all returns a
Relation.
The code is moved to active_record_deprecated_finders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously it returned an Array.
If you want an array, call e.g. `Post.to_a` rather than `Post.all`. This
is more explicit.
In most cases this should not break existing code, since
Relations use method_missing to delegate unknown methods to #to_a
anyway.
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes #1190
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Merge commit 6f1d9d00ffd9d411b2bd488da4eb92b7e2fd972e
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This helps bring the interfaces of CollectionProxy and Relation closer
together, and reduces the delegation backflips we need to perform.
For example, first_or_create is defined thus:
class ActiveRecord::Relation
def first_or_create(...)
first || create(...)
end
end
If CollectionProxy < Relation, then post.comments.first_or_create will
hit the association's #create method which will actually add the new record
to the association, just as post.comments.create would.
With the previous delegation, post.comments.first_or_create expands to
post.comments.scoped.first_or_create, where post.comments.scoped has no
knowledge of the association.
|