[rspec-users] Collection proxies need to be stubbed ?
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
> 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
> OK. I'll shut up now. Go Bears!
>> ---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
>>> should encapsulate all knowledge about projects; TDA says we
>>> ask for the project proxy. Yes?
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users