| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
a concept of default scope in its example before it is introduced in the following section titled `Applying a default scope`.
It makes more sense to switch the ordering to introduce default scopes (`Applying a default scope`) first and then go into `Merging of scopes` section where it is used.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
[ci skip]
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
find_by_* and find_by_*! are not deprecated for example, so lets add a
note only where it is needed
[ci skip]
|
| |
|
| |
he or she => they
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
activesupport/lib/active_support/core_ext/hash/deep_merge.rb
activesupport/lib/active_support/core_ext/hash/keys.rb
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
---
Revert "syntax error joining/including models"
This reverts commit ac35f72f30c47298a20a90c8c537db888b463bbb.
---
Revert "syntax error joining tables"
This reverts commit c365986b48c3e8bc8c7f3fa6a8521616ed5dc138.
---
Comments:
https://github.com/rails/docrails/commit/c365986b48c3e8bc8c7f3fa6a8521616ed5dc138#commitcomment-4630684
|
| | |
| |
| | |
syntax error joining/including models
|
| | |
| |
| | |
syntax error joining tables
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
I'm pretty confused about the addition of this method. The documentation
says that it was intended to allow the removal of values from the
default scope (in contrast to #except). However it behaves exactly the
same as except: https://gist.github.com/jonleighton/7537008 (other than
having a slightly enhanced syntax).
The removal of the default scope is allowed by
94924dc32baf78f13e289172534c2e71c9c8cade, which was not a change we
could make until 4.1 due to the need to deprecate things. However after
that change #unscope still gives us nothing that #except doesn't already
give us.
However there *is* a desire to be able to unscope stuff in a way that
persists across merges, which would allow associations to be defined
which unscope stuff from the default scope of the associated model. E.g.
has_many :comments, -> { unscope where: :trashed }
So that's what this change implements. I've also corrected the
documentation. I removed the guide references to #except as I think
unscope really supercedes #except now.
While we're here, there's also a potential desire to be able to write
this:
has_many :comments, -> { unscoped }
However, it doesn't make sense and would not be straightforward to
implement. While with #unscope we're specifying exactly what we want to
be removed from the relation, with "unscoped" we're just saying that we
want it to not have some things which were added earlier on by the
default scope. However in the case of an association, we surely don't
want *all* conditions to be removed, otherwise the above would just
become "SELECT * FROM comments" with no foreign key constraint.
To make the above work, we'd have to somehow tag the relation values
which get added when evaluating the default scope in order to
differentiate them from other relation values. Which is way too much
complexity and therefore not worth it when most use cases can be
satisfied with unscope.
Closes #10643, #11061.
|
| |/ |
|
| |\ |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
| |
used with create_with in ActiveRecord Querying guide
|
| |\ |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
The right command for doing that is Client.exists?id:[1,2,3]
Exists does not work like find method, in find method you can do Person.find(1, 2, 6) or Person.find([7, 17]) but not Person.exists?(1,2,3) or Person.exists?([1,2,3])
|
| | |
| |
| | |
In the example of join models, there are five models but in the explanation only consider Category, Post, Comment and Guest.
|
| |/
|
|
| |
Explain that `pluck` differs from `select` in that it does not construct `ActiveRecord` objects and thus model-level overrides are unavailable.
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
actionview/README.rdoc
activerecord/lib/active_record/migration.rb
guides/source/development_dependencies_install.md
guides/source/getting_started.md
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This reverts commit 70d6e16fbad75b89dd1798ed697e7732b8606fa3, reversing
changes made to ea4db3bc078fb3093ecdddffdf4f2f4ff3e1e8f9.
Seems to be a code merge done by mistake.
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
order on the old ones
The previous behavior added a major backward incompatibility since it
impossible to have a upgrade path without major changes on the
application code.
We are taking the most conservative path to be consistent with the idea
of having a smoother upgrade on Rails 4.
We are reverting the behavior for what was in Rails 3.x and,
if needed, we will implement a new API to prepend the order clauses in
Rails 4.1.
|
| |
|
|
| |
To share a certain logic across other examples, let's add a sample SQL
code generated by the given Ruby code
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit f573df32d43c413a5098721ba6151ff190c23c6c.
The original idea of this documentation was to showcase the feature
where you can remove some only queries attributes with a single
key-value pair.
|
| |
|
|
| |
[ci skip]
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
querying guide
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
guides/source/layout.html.erb
|
| | | |
|
| |/ |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Conflicts:
guides/source/upgrading_ruby_on_rails.md
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
| |
http://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_querying.html#merging-of-scopes
|
| |
|
|
| |
the guide accordingly
|
| |
|
|
| |
/cc @fxn
|
