-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
Fluent interface for associations. #4437
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
Currently there is a list of possible keys for each association type in which the description of some key changes a little in each association case. Seems good to me, unless we review and unify the descriptions. |
|
|
||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| You can also use arrays to customize your associations:: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The docs should note that this is deprecated and not recommended.
"For the sake of backwards compatibility you can also use..."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It kind of does below it. As of right now it is not deprecated by the way, only less recommended.
And it probably won't either as long as mass assignment as documented on the same page still is around :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd start the block with that info so that it is clear what you are reading is about out-of-date interfaces.
And why wouldn't it be deprecated? Are there 4 states now: recommended, non-recommended, deprecated, removed? Or can we cut it down to default, deprecated, removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it is more a personal preference at this point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So won't the array interface be deprecated for 4.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can decide on that at a later point in time IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Personally I'd prefer to keep the array config style. I know I'm an outlier in that preference though.
|
Looks good to me. |
|
Mentioning the new fluent interface in the migration guide would be good as I use that to do release announcements andcwe recommend that for people who are upgrading. |
|
Should we continue here? |
inoas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
After the fixes it LGTM.
en/orm/associations.rst
Outdated
| ]); | ||
| $this->belongsTo('Users') | ||
| ->setForeignKey('user_id') | ||
| ->setJoinType('INNER',); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Surplus ','
en/orm/associations.rst
Outdated
| 'dependent' => true, | ||
| $this->hasMany('Comments') | ||
| ->setForeignKey('article_id') | ||
| ->setDependent(true, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Surplus ,
Edit: And chain call syntax should end on the same line. Which also has a surplus ].
en/orm/associations.rst
Outdated
| $this->hasMany('Comments') | ||
| ->setForeignKey('article_id') | ||
| ->setDependent(true, | ||
| ]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Surplus ] and ); should be on the line above.
Docs changes for cakephp/cakephp#9676
This will switch to fluent interface but contains a note for arrays still.
Also the table of possible array keys might have to be switched to setters.
Can we maybe use a table here?
etc?
Or how can we do it?