Hi Steve

I'm not sure you got my point ;-)

Steve Downey wrote:
> > I have two models, Menu and MenuText (many langs, so many texts per
> > menu). (see sql below)
> >
> > If I define has_many:
> >
> > class Menu < ActiveRecord::Base
> >    has_many :menu_texts, :conditions => ['lang = ?', 'fr']
> > end
> > class MenuText < ActiveRecord::Base
> >    belongs_to :menu
> > end
> >
> > then
> >  Menu.find(1).menu_texts.first shows the unique menu_text associated to
> > the menu.

>  You said there are many, so menu_texts (note the plural) returns an array.

Sure, as I wrote: > > no pb, everything works.

> > But if I change to has_one:
> > class Menu < ActiveRecord::Base
> >    has_one :menu_text, :conditions => ['lang = ?', 'fr']
> > end
> >
> > then
> >  Menu.find(1).menu_text raises an error (array to string conversion)

>  You said it has one, so menu_text (no plural) returns a single object.

No! It raises an error, array to string conversion, whereas of course
I'd like to see an object.
The error disappear if I replace
  :conditions =>  ['lang = ?', 'fr']
by
  :conditions =>  ['lang = fr']

so the reason is clearly in the way conditions are handled.

> > It's due to the difference of treatment that conditions receive in both
> > associations code:
> >
> >  active_record/associations/has_many_association.rb:
> >    @finder_sql << " AND #{interpolate_sql(@conditions)}" if @conditions
> >
> >  active_record/associations/has_one_association.rb, li 68:
> >    #{@options[:conditions] ? " AND " + @options[:conditions].
> >
> > Why does has_one treat conditions differently?


-- 
Jean-Christophe Michel
_______________________________________________
Rails mailing list
Rails@[...].org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails