- 29 6月, 2014 2 次提交
- 06 6月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 Yves Senn 提交于
Closes #15541.
-
- 02 6月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 Zachary Scott 提交于
duplicating API reference in guides. Also
✂ [ci skip]
-
- 01 6月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 Mauro George 提交于
[ci skip]
-
- 25 5月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 John Kelly Ferguson 提交于
-
- 23 5月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 peeyush 提交于
-
- 22 5月, 2014 2 次提交
-
-
由 John Kelly Ferguson 提交于
-
由 peeyush 提交于
-
- 03 4月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 ariabov 提交于
In Active Record Querying guide, currently `Merging of scopes` section uses 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.
-
- 20 3月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 chriskohlbrenner 提交于
-
- 19 2月, 2014 2 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
[ci skip]
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
-
- 18 2月, 2014 3 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
-
由 Rashmi Yadav 提交于
-
- 27 1月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 Greg Saks 提交于
-
- 17 1月, 2014 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
find_by_* and find_by_*! are not deprecated for example, so lets add a note only where it is needed [ci skip]
-
- 02 12月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Guillermo Iguaran 提交于
he or she => they
-
- 25 11月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Vipul A M 提交于
-
- 21 11月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Jon Leighton 提交于
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 94924dc3, 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.
-
- 19 11月, 2013 4 次提交
-
-
由 Carlos Antonio da Silva 提交于
-
由 Carlos Antonio da Silva 提交于
```yaml Revert "syntax error joining/including models" This reverts commit ac35f72f. ``` Revert "syntax error joining tables" This reverts commit c365986b. --- Comments: https://github.com/rails/docrails/commit/c365986b48c3e8bc8c7f3fa6a8521616ed5dc138#commitcomment-4630684
-
由 Sergio 提交于
syntax error joining/including models
-
由 Sergio 提交于
syntax error joining tables
-
- 16 11月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Sıtkı Bağdat 提交于
-
- 26 9月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Yves Senn 提交于
-
- 25 9月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Daniel Lissner 提交于
[ci skip] Correct the explanation of the example for find_or_create_by when used with create_with in ActiveRecord Querying guide
-
- 23 9月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Weston Platter 提交于
-
- 05 9月, 2013 4 次提交
-
-
由 Sergio 提交于
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
-
由 Sergio 提交于
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])
-
由 Eugene Gilburg 提交于
Explain that `pluck` differs from `select` in that it does not construct `ActiveRecord` objects and thus model-level overrides are unavailable.
-
- 04 9月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Sergio 提交于
In the example of join models, there are five models but in the explanation only consider Category, Post, Comment and Guest.
-
- 22 8月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Sugino Yasuhiro 提交于
-
- 18 8月, 2013 1 次提交
-
- 30 7月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael Mendonça França 提交于
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.
-
- 26 7月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Robin Dupret 提交于
To share a certain logic across other examples, let's add a sample SQL code generated by the given Ruby code
-
- 18 7月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Erich Kist 提交于
This reverts commit f573df32. 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.
-
- 08 7月, 2013 1 次提交
-
-
由 Akira Matsuda 提交于
[ci skip]
-