link_to_remote the right way in Rails 3.0?

I have been using link_to_remote forever now. I have also been using
jquery through jrails.

I am readying my code for Rails 3.0, and am wondering what is the best
way to accomplish.

For example, I have something like this all over in Rails 2.0

<%= link_to_remote "XXX",
                      { :url => "/activities/hide_dock", :update =>
"dock-container", :complete => "fixDock()" }, { :class => "activities" }
%>

def hide_dock
  render :partial => "/layouts/dock"
end

Now, in Rails 3.0 I am planning this

<%= raw link_to "XXX", "/activities/hide_dock",
                      {:remote => true, :class => "activities" }
%>

def hide_dock
  respond_to do |format|
    format.html
      format.js do
        ??? What do I put here ???
      end
    end
end

My main question is since I am using jQuery, is there any point in using
RJS?

Should I just have

render :layout => false

and in hide_dock.js.erb just use jQuery code with <%= render :partial
=>%> where appropriate.

I have been using link_to_remote forever now. I have also been using

jquery through jrails.

I am readying my code for Rails 3.0, and am wondering what is the best

way to accomplish.

For example, I have something like this all over in Rails 2.0

<%= link_to_remote “XXX”,

                  { :url => "/activities/hide_dock", :update =>

“dock-container”, :complete => “fixDock()” }, { :class => “activities” }

%>

Sharkie, I would recommend reading the following first before you start

upgrading from Rails 2.x to Rails 3.x:

http://blog.peepcode.com/tutorials/2010/live-coding-rails-3-upgrade

Next, link_to_remote has been deprecated in Rails 3 and you would

need to do the following:

<%= link_to “XXX”, { :remote => true }, { … } %>

def hide_dock

render :partial => “/layouts/dock”

end

Now, in Rails 3.0 I am planning this

<%= raw link_to “XXX”, “/activities/hide_dock”,

                  {:remote => true, :class => "activities" }

%>

Next, the above shouldn’t use raw because link_to method

returns an html_safe string in Rails 3.

def hide_dock

respond_to do |format|

format.html

  format.js do

    ????? What do I put here ?????

If you’re using RJS, then you’ll simple add

the expression to be executed. For example,

I tend to be partial to JSON and I would do the

following:

format.js # render the action.js.rjs by default

or you can redefine it as follows to return json

format.js { render :json => @some_object }

end

end

end

It’s not clear as to what you’re trying to do. The hide_dock is a controller

action so do you want to allow the following:

http://some_domain.com/controller_name/hide_dock

My main question is since I am using jQuery, is there any point in using

RJS?

If you intend on using jQuery, then there’s no need to use RJS. Just make

sure that you get the JS file here:

http://github.com/rails/jquery-ujs

Should I just have

render :layout => false

If you’re updating just a part of the page, then you’ll need to use the above.

and in hide_dock.js.erb just use jQuery code with <%= render :partial

=>%> where appropriate.

Lastly, I would recommend getting the PDF for "Agile Web Development with

Rails 4th Ed" by Sam Ruby, Dave Thomas, et al from pragprog.com for additional

information regarding the questions that you have above.

Good luck,

-Conrad

I have been using link_to_remote forever now. I have also been using

jquery through jrails.

I am readying my code for Rails 3.0, and am wondering what is the best

way to accomplish.

For example, I have something like this all over in Rails 2.0

<%= link_to_remote “XXX”,

                  { :url => "/activities/hide_dock", :update =>

“dock-container”, :complete => “fixDock()” }, { :class => “activities” }

%>

Sharkie, I would recommend reading the following first before you start

upgrading from Rails 2.x to Rails 3.x:

http://blog.peepcode.com/tutorials/2010/live-coding-rails-3-upgrade

Here’s another excellent reference that goes into greater detail of

convert from Rails 2.x to Rails 3.x:

http://www.railsupgradehandbook.com

Good luck,

-Conrad