Rails Routes, Have Nested Resources and Not Nested Resources

Question

is it bad form to end up with routes that look something like this?:

resources :users
  resources :places

resources :places

Since users have many places, and there are also many places that may not be associated with a user, just curious if this is ok, will I run into route problems or db problems since places has been stated twice as a resource? Thanks!

CambridgeMike · Accepted Answer · 2012-08-02 02:32:48Z

1

yeah that's not great. Try using :shallow => true to accomplish the same effect.

resources :users, :shallow => true do
  resources :places 
end

http://archives.ryandaigle.com/articles/2008/9/7/what-s-new-in-edge-rails-shallow-routes/

http://apidock.com/rails/ActionController/Resources/resources

answered Aug 2, 2012 at 2:32

CambridgeMike

4,6421 gold badge31 silver badges38 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

3 Comments

Steve Over a year ago

does shallow still send more than one route to the same place? e.g. will /users/1/places/1 and /places/1 both exist?

CambridgeMike Over a year ago

Aren't these redundant? If you have the places ID just use /places/1. If you want to see what routes are available you can always call rake routes

botbot Over a year ago

the problem with this is that you still can't see all places via /places. you know a workaround for this?

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Rails Routes, Have Nested Resources and Not Nested Resources

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related