"Nil object": really?

Hello,-

I am developing a rails app with this method in it:

# PUT /newsletters/1;send   def sendmails     newsletter = Newsletter.find_by_id_and_sent(params[:id], false)     users = User.find(:all)     raise users.to_yaml     #debugger     users.each do |user| #evaluates to nil.each - debug       Notifier.deliver_newsletter(user, newsletter)     end     newsletter.update_attribute('sent', true)     redirect_to newsletters_path   end

I get an error saying that users.each do |user| evaluates to nil.each, and that I probably expected an Array object there. This is true, I did expect an Array object. Thing is, now I've tried to debug the code with both debugger and raise to_yaml, and both times the users variable evaluates to a perfect Array of 3 Users, exactly in correspondence with the DB! I have also tried to debug the user variable and it evaluates to a User with id 1, meaning the iterator fetches that user successfully from the Array.

Yet after the first iteration, I get an error / crash.

I have tried to change users to @users, with the exact same result. Debugging shows an Array of 3 user objects. The app crashes.

What is going on here?

Thanks in advance, Vahagn

Are you sure that the error message is on that each, not another one ? What's the stack trace like?

Fred

Frederick Cheung wrote:

Hello,-

Yet after the first iteration, I get an error / crash.

I have tried to change users to @users, with the exact same result. Debugging shows an Array of 3 user objects. The app crashes.

Are you sure that the error message is on that each, not another one ? What's the stack trace like?

Fred

Hi Fred,-

here's the stack trace. Whatever it is that is causing the problem, I cannot glean it from there:

app/controllers/newsletters_controller.rb:60:in `sendmails' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/base.rb:1158:in `send' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/base.rb:1158:in `perform_action_without_filters' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/filters.rb:697:in `call_filters' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/filters.rb:689:in `perform_action_without_benchmark' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/benchmarking.rb:68:in `perform_action_without_rescue' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/benchmarking.rb:68:in `perform_action_without_rescue' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/rescue.rb:199:in `perform_action_without_caching' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/caching.rb:678:in `perform_action' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.0.2/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/abstract/query_cache.rb:33:in `cache' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.0.2/lib/active_record/query_cache.rb:8:in `cache' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/caching.rb:677:in `perform_action' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/base.rb:524:in `send' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/base.rb:524:in `process_without_filters' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/filters.rb:685:in `process_without_session_management_support' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/session_management.rb:123:in `process' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.0.2/lib/action_controller/base.rb:388:in `process' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:489:in `load' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:489:in `load' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:342:in `new_constants_in' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:489:in `load' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.0.2/lib/commands/servers/mongrel.rb:64 /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:496:in `require' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:342:in `new_constants_in' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.0.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:496:in `require' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.0.2/lib/commands/server.rb:39

/ V.

And here's the output of raise users.to_yaml:

Vahagn Hayrapetyan wrote:

    users.each do |user| #evaluates to nil.each - debug

In general, you need to cut your action up into tiny methods and write unit tests on each one. They incredibly reduce the odds of exactly this kind of drama! Then the methods should run in the model layer, and the controller should only call into the model.

Specifically, check if 'users' is aliased anywhere else, such as to a method. Then try this:

  (users || ).each

That will force a nil users to behave like an empty array. .find(:all) should naturally return an empty array if you have no users, so you should not need this tweak. But it lets you manually debug more:

   (users || (p 'still nil!'; ).each

Hi Phlip, I appreciate the feedback. Firstly, I renamed users to all_users and the error is still there; therefore, no aliasing occurs.

Secondly, I've tried as you wrote:

  (all_users || (p 'still nil!'; ).each       Notifier.deliver_newsletter(user, newsletter)    end

but that gives a syntax error ("Unexpected kEND"). I'm new to Ruby!

Lastly, do you mean to say that this method is best moved to the Newsletter model instead of being in the controller?

/ Vahagn

Hello Vahagn, I suggest you do it as follows: a) old-fashioned way by using puts liberally & b) take baby steps until it is debugged.

Your code with puts statements inserted; just an example:

  def sendmails     newsletter = Newsletter.find_by_id_and_sent(params[:id], false)     users = User.find(:all)     # do not raise anything... confuses Ruby interpretor     puts users     users.each do |user|       puts user       #Notifier.deliver_newsletter(user, newsletter)     end     #newsletter.update_attribute('sent', true)     #redirect_to newsletters_path   end

Make sure first that the each iterator is printing your object instances correctly. You can use "pp" short for pretty-print if you want but then you will have to require it. puts is built into the language and most of the times, it is sufficient.

This way, you can be absolutely sure that nothing unexpected is happening with your basic loop. Once you are sure then you can uncomment each statement one by one, e.g., uncomment Notifier.... first and test. If that works then go to newslettr.update...

Hope this helps.

Bharat

Thanks Bharat, that was excellent advice. It turns out the real trouble is being caused by this line:

Notifier.deliver_newsletter(user, newsletter)

Now, the stack trace looks like this:

NameError in Newsletters#sendmails

Showing notifier/newsletter.text.plain.rhtml where line #3 raised:

undefined local variable or method `user' for #<ActionView::Base:0x23df2a0>

Extracted source (around line #3):

1: My Newsletter 2: 3: <%= render :inline => @body %>

I have a Notifier class that looks like this:

class Notifier < ActionMailer::ARMailer   def newsletter(user, newsletter)     recipients user.email     from "MyApp <system@app.net>"     subject newsletter.subject     body :body => newsletter.body, :user => user   end end

...and this is the file the stack trace refers to:

/app/views/notifier/newsletter.text.plain.rhtml:

My Newsletter

<%= render :inline => @body %>

Still - user is not being referenced from this file at all, so why the error?

Thanks again, / Vahagn

Glad to be of help. I am no expert on ActiveRecord Mailer, but when I run into problems like this, I turn to: 1. Agile Web Development book -- Excellent discussion on this topic 2. Rails Way by Obie Fernandez -- Anyone doing any serious development should have this book I am sure you can figure this out by a bit of reading and research.

Hi Bharat,-

there's hardly a Rails book that is not near the top of my Amazon wish list - so you're right on :wink:

Cheers, Vahagn

Bharat Ruparel wrote: