This project is archived and is in readonly mode.
Inconsistent method_defined? behaviour
Reported by Michał Łomnicki | April 3rd, 2010 @ 01:25 AM
Attribute methods of ActiveRecord classes are created via
method_missing but take care only for handling respond_to?
For example method_defined? or instance_methods know nothing about methods dynamically created by AR.
$ script/generate model User login:text $ script/console >> User.method_defined?(:login) => false >> User.instance_methods.include?('login') => false >> User.new => Userid: integer.... >> User.method_defined?(:login) => true >> User.instance_methods.include?('login') => true
This isn't supposed to be a problem with more 'magic' methods
like dynamic finders. At least dynamic finder methods keep
consistent behavior and are always reported as non-existed.
Issue touches ActiveRecord 3.0 as well.
Comments and changes to this ticket
- Tag changed from activerecord 3.0, activerecord, attributes, method_missing to activerecord 30, activerecord, attributes, method_missing
- State changed from new to open
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been commented on for at least three months.
The resources of the Rails core team are limited, and so we are asking for your help. If you can still reproduce this error on the 3-0-stable branch or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it and add "[state:open]" to your comment. This will reopen the ticket for review. Likewise, if you feel that this is a very important feature for Rails to include, please reply with your explanation so we can consider it.
Thank you for all your contributions, and we hope you will understand this step to focus our efforts where they are most helpful.
Create your profile
Help contribute to this project by taking a few moments to create your personal profile. Create your profile »
<h2 style="font-size: 14px">Tickets have moved to Github</h2>
The new ticket tracker is available at <a href="https://github.com/rails/rails/issues">https://github.com/rails/rails/issues</a>