[rspec-users] Collection proxies need to be stubbed ?

Brian Yamabe brian at yamabe.net
Sun Jan 21 18:32:20 EST 2007


David, thanks for making me think. If the bi-directional dependency  
is needed, would it be cleaned up with a "has_many :through" (An  
Assignment class as an example)?

> def self.find_active_projects_for_user(user)
>   return user.projects.active_projects
> end
>
> This bi-directional dependency seems problematic to me. I realize that
> rails makes it easy to do these, but again, just because its easy
> doesn't make it a good decision.
>
> This is one of those questions that can be enlightened by client need.
> Do clients of Projects ask for their users? Do clients of User ask for
> its Projects? If both answers are yes, then maybe the bi-directional
> deal makes sense. If only one is needed, then only one should be
> implemented.
>
> OK. I'll shut up now. Go Bears!
>
> David
>
>
>> ---Brian Yamabe
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Jay Levitt wrote:
>>
>>> Francois Beausoleil wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Adding #active_projects on User leads to a kind of namespace
>>>> pollution, no ?  Really, who knows what projects are active ?  The
>>>> Project class, or the User ?
>>>
>>> This seems to be a basic conflict between "Tell, don't ask" and
>>> domain-driven design.  DDD, as I understand it, says the Project  
>>> class
>>> should encapsulate all knowledge about projects; TDA says we  
>>> shouldn't
>>> ask for the project proxy.  Yes?
>>>
>>> Jay
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



More information about the rspec-users mailing list