Rails 4.0.0 strong parameters don't seem to work as documented -

-

the example used in documentation (http://guides.rubyonrails.org/action_controller_overview.html#strong-parameters) strong parameters is:

params.require(:person).permit(:name, :age)

however, doesn't work because require() returns value of parameter, not parameter object permit() can called on.

$ rails console 1.9.3p286 :005 > params = actioncontroller::parameters.new(person: 1, name: "joe", age: 30)  => {"person"=>1, "name"=>"joe", "age"=>30}  1.9.3p286 :006 > params.require(:person).permit(:name, :age) nomethoderror: undefined method `permit' 1:fixnum     (irb):6     /users/jeremyburton/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p286/gems/railties-4.0.0/lib/rails/commands/console.rb:90:in `start'     /users/jeremyburton/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p286/gems/railties-4.0.0/lib/rails/commands/console.rb:9:in `start'     /users/jeremyburton/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p286/gems/railties-4.0.0/lib/rails/commands.rb:64:in `<top (required)>'     bin/rails:4:in `require'     bin/rails:4:in `<main>'

additionally, seems odd require can take 1 parameter. seems should able do:

params.require(:a, :b).permit(:c, :d)

whereas, have is:

params.require(:a) params.require(:b) params.permit(:a, :b, :c, :d)

which doesn't seem dry - if parameter required definition permitted, surely.

am missing something?

the intention of require working rails form_for objects, whereby params hash include name of object you're wrapping form around. this:

actioncontroller::parameters.new(person: { name: 'francesco' }).require(:person)

in case, form_for have been wrapped around person object. .require(:person) wrap resulting hash ({ name: 'francesco' }) actioncontroller::parameters object can respond .permit. test wasn't mimicking expected params use-case.

also, makes sense require accept 1 argument since you'd want setup unique <attribute>_params method per object type since, again, these meant wrappers around specific object. but, you'd have 1 root object being sent form submit, , sub objects within that.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

c# - How Configure Devart dotConnect for SQLite Code First? -

-
can configure following sample code ? when run following code, error : no entity framework provider found ado.net provider invariant name 'devart.data.sqlite' setting in machine.config <system.data> <dbproviderfactories> <add name="dotconnect sqlite" invariant="devart.data.sqlite" description="devart dotconnect sqlite" type="devart.data.sqlite.sqliteproviderfactory, devart.data.sqlite, version=4.6.287.0, culture=neutral, publickeytoken=09af7300eec23701" /> </dbproviderfactories> </system.data> after add below block code in app.config <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration>   <configsections> <!-- more information on entity framework configuration, visit http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=237468 --> <section name="entityframework" type="system.data.entity.internal.configfile.entityframeworksection, entit...
Read more

java - Copying object fields -

-
what best way of copying classes when need have 2 independent variables? have simple class: public class myclass { boolean = false; string b= "not empty"; } do need make method : assign(myclass data ) { a= data.a; b= data.b; } is there automatic method copy (duplicate) objects in java? do need make method : pretty close. instead of making method, should make constructor. such constructors called copy constructor , , create them this: myclass(myclass data) { = data.a; b = data.b; } and create copy of instance, use constructor this: myclass obj1 = new myclass(); myclass obj2 = new myclass(obj1); copy constructor can tedious : using copy constructor create deep-copy can tedious, when class has mutable fields. in case, assignment create copy of reference, , not object itself. have create copy of fields (if want deep copy). can go recursive. a better way create deep copy serialize , deserialize object. why not use clone()? ...
Read more

c++ - Clear the memory after returning a vector in a function -

-
i have function processes , stores lot of data in , returns results vector of class. amount of data stored in function tremendous , want clear storage memory of function after finished job. necessary (does function automatically clear memory) or should clear memory function? update: vector<customers> process(char* const *filename, vector<int> id) { vector<customers> list_of_customers; (perform actions) return list_of_customers; } variables defined locally within function automatically released @ end of function scope. destructors objects called, should free memory allocated objects (if objects coded correctly). example of such object std::vector . anything you've allocated new must have corresponding delete release storage. try avoid doing own allocation , use raii instead, i.e. containers or smart pointers.
Read more