Raise error when generating attribute with dangerous name

[p8]

Generating a model with attributes named hash or save should raise an error, instead of generating a migration with an invalid attribute.

Checklist

Before submitting the PR make sure the following are checked:

• This Pull Request is related to one change. Changes that are unrelated should be opened in separate PRs.
• Commit message has a detailed description of what changed and why. If this PR fixes a related issue include it in the commit message. Ex: [Fix #issue-number]
• Tests are added or updated if you fix a bug or add a feature.
• CHANGELOG files are updated for the changed libraries if there is a behavior change or additional feature. Minor bug fixes and documentation changes should not be included.

[kamipo]

It hard to read the use of exclude? in multiple conditions to me.
Let's keep it as it is.

[p8]

Thanks @kamipo. I've reverted the refactoring.

[camertron]

I just ran into an issue caused by this change in the view_component project. Our preview generator defines an :attributes argument. The NamedBase class eventually converts each attribute into a GeneratedAttribute, which attempts to determine if the attribute is dangerous.

Unfortunately, view_component's test suite doesn't have activerecord configured, so it blows up with:

Error:
PreviewGeneratorTest#test_component_with_namespace_and_attributes:
NameError: uninitialized constant #<Class:Rails::Generators::GeneratedAttribute>::ActiveRecord

I tried requiring activerecord in the dummy app, but doing so means we have to install and configure a database, which I'd rather not do.

The bigger issue in my mind is that the change in this PR perhaps inadvertently couples the Rails generator code to activerecord, which not all apps have set up. Moreover, generated attributes are not just an activerecord thing as our preview generator demonstrates.

Perhaps we could move ActiveRecord::Base.dangerous_attribute_method? into activesupport or to somewhere more easily accessible?

[kamipo]

Actually, coupling with activerecord has happened before at #42311.
We probably should do checking defined?(ActiveRecord::Base) like NamedBase already does.

rails/railties/lib/rails/generators/named_base.rb

Lines 196 to 198 in 83f36d5

	def pluralize_table_names? # :doc:
	!defined?(ActiveRecord::Base) || ActiveRecord::Base.pluralize_table_names
	end

[rafaelfranca]

Yes. We should. @p8 mind to open a PR?

[p8]

@rafaelfranca I've created a PR.