From 1e7cf6c7e9aede02e417885847346c225d309302 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jon Leighton Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 22:11:20 +0000 Subject: Try to make fetch_first_or_last_using_find? more readable --- .../associations/association_collection.rb | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'activerecord') diff --git a/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_collection.rb b/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_collection.rb index c112f2b5d0..0ab2b4fb9d 100644 --- a/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_collection.rb +++ b/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_collection.rb @@ -513,9 +513,27 @@ module ActiveRecord end end + # Should we deal with assoc.first or assoc.last by issuing an independent query to + # the database, or by getting the target, and then taking the first/last item from that? + # + # If the args is just a non-empty options hash, go to the database. + # + # Otherwise, go to the database only if none of the following are true: + # * target already loaded + # * owner is new record + # * custom :finder_sql exists + # * target contains new or changed record(s) + # * the first arg is an integer (which indicates the number of records to be returned) def fetch_first_or_last_using_find?(args) - (args.first.kind_of?(Hash) && !args.first.empty?) || !(loaded? || @owner.new_record? || @reflection.options[:finder_sql] || - @target.any? { |record| record.new_record? || record.changed? } || args.first.kind_of?(Integer)) + if args.first.kind_of?(Hash) && !args.first.empty? + true + else + !(loaded? || + @owner.new_record? || + @reflection.options[:finder_sql] || + @target.any? { |record| record.new_record? || record.changed? } || + args.first.kind_of?(Integer)) + end end def include_in_memory?(record) -- cgit v1.2.3