recognize_path

rubyonrails-core
1

Hello all,

While looking into a issue posted on the Lockdown forum I came across the following:

ActionController::Routing::Routes.recognize_path “/users/1/edit” => {:action=>“1”, :controller=>“users”, :id=>“edit”}

Notice the :action and :id value swap.

Is this a mis-use of the recognize_path method…In other words, is it intended to be used with named routes only? Or is this just a simple bug that needs to be fixed?

thanks, andy

2

Hello all,

While looking into a issue posted on the Lockdown forum I came across the following:

ActionController::Routing::Routes.recognize_path "/users/1/edit" => {:action=>"1", :controller=>"users", :id=>"edit"}

Notice the :action and :id value swap.

Is this a mis-use of the recognize_path method...In other words, is it intended to be used with named routes only? Or is this just a simple bug that needs to be fixed?

Technically it might not even be a bug, it seems to be matching on :controller/:action/:id. What do you have in your routes file?

But even more fundamentally, why are you calling recognize_path directly? Perhaps there's an easier way?

3

Technically it might not even be a bug, it seems to be matching on

:controller/:action/:id. What do you have in your routes file?

But even more fundamentally, why are you calling recognize_path

directly? Perhaps there’s an easier way?

If there is an easier way, that would be great.

The routes file contains just a simple map.resources :users.

It’s being used in lockdown for the case when someone passes in a named route to the link_to method, such as:

link_to “Login”, login_path

I need to get the actual path to either grant/deny the ability to show the link. I was using recognize_path to return the hash related to the named route.

Does that explain it? Let me know if more info is needed.

thanks, andy

4

If there is an easier way, that would be great.

The routes file contains just a simple map.resources :users.

It’s being used in lockdown for the case when someone passes in a named route to the link_to method, such as:

link_to “Login”, login_path

I need to get the actual path to either grant/deny the ability to show the link. I was using recognize_path to return the hash related to the named route.

Does that explain it? Let me know if more info is needed.

To add a little more…

If the request is http://localhost:3000/login

and

map.login, :controller => “sessions”, :action => “destroy”

I need to know that /login => {:controller => “sessions”, :action => "destroy} when the request is made. So, it’s just not the link_to call.

thanks again, andy

5

map.login, :controller => “sessions”, :action => “destroy”

ooops. typing too fast: :action => “new” for login. doh!

6

If there is an easier way, that would be great.

The routes file contains just a simple map.resources :users.

Does the /users/1/edit url actually *go* to the right place when you access it?

It's being used in lockdown for the case when someone passes in a named route to the link_to method, such as:

link_to "Login", login_path

I need to get the actual path to either grant/deny the ability to show the link. I was using recognize_path to return the hash related to the named route.

Does that explain it? Let me know if more info is needed.

I assume map.connect ':controller/:action/:id' is either removed or comes *after* the map.resources call? If it's the other way around then this if functioning as intended.

7

If there is an easier way, that would be great.

The routes file contains just a simple map.resources :users.

Does the /users/1/edit url actually go to the right place when you access it?

Yes it does.

It’s being used in lockdown for the case when someone passes in a named

route to the link_to method, such as:

link_to “Login”, login_path

I need to get the actual path to either grant/deny the ability to show the

link. I was using recognize_path to return the hash related to the named

route.

Does that explain it? Let me know if more info is needed.

I assume map.connect ‘:controller/:action/:id’ is either removed or

comes after the map.resources call? If it’s the other way around

then this if functioning as intended.

map.connect ‘:controller/:action/:id’ is at the end of my routes file. This is the way it should be, right?

8

Yes it does.

Well that's very strange...

map.connect ':controller/:action/:id' is at the end of my routes file. This is the way it should be, right?

The only other thing I can think of is the request method, which is also something that affects route matching. you may need to provide recognize_path with more information in the enviroment hash to make sure it matches correctly. If you can reproduce this in a tiny test app, and upload it to lighthouse, people may be able to give you a hand. Similarly if you can make it fail in the routing tests that'd make things easier.