Parent in result of to_params for instances of has_many #3
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…params on an instance of a has_many.
dturnerTS
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This behavior seems incorrect in the case where belongs_to has not been set.
The parent is inserted by the fetch method of has_many_association (https://github.com/remiprev/her/blob/master/lib/her/model/associations/has_many_association.rb#L88)
I believe that the to_params method (https://github.com/remiprev/her/blob/master/lib/her/model/parse.rb#L34) should be responsible for removing the parent for the hash.
However, the class, Foo::Bar in my example, does not know its parent, Foo::User, and therefore can't tell if it should delete :user from the hash. To remedy this I'm leaning towards adding a class variable that tracks which params need to be removed by to_params. Does this sound reasonable or do you believe there is a preferable method?