问题
I'm using Rails 3.2.0
Let's say I have:
class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :articles
end
c1 = Comment.last
then
c1.articles.class
# => Array
c1.articles.where('id NOT IN (999999)').class
# => ActiveRecord::Relation
Why is the result of an association not a type of ActiveRecord::Relation?
It clearly is / was at some point:
c1.articles.to_orig
# undefined method `to_orig' for #<ActiveRecord::Relation:0x007fd820cc80a8>
c1.articles.class
# => Array
Certain evaluations act upon an ActiveRecord::Relation object, but inspecting the class gives a different type.
Particularly, this breaks building lazy-loaded queries when using merge to concat multiple queries.
回答1:
It is an ActiveRecord::Relation, but Rails is intentionally lying to you. You can see this already in the method calls, and continue to see it by calling ancestors, which includes a slew of ActiveRecord classes:
c1.articles.ancestors.select { |c| c.to_s =~ /ActiveRecord/ }.size #=> 35
which shows that it is very much not an Array.
This happens because what you’re getting back when calling c1.articles is an ActiveRecord::Associations::CollectionProxy*, which undefines class (along with many other methods). This means that class gets delegated via its method_missing, which sends it to target. As we can see, the class of target here is, in fact, Array:
c1.articles.target.class #=> Array
That is where c1.articles.class comes from. Nevertheless, it is an ActiveRecord::Relation.
* We can verify that it is indeed an ActiveRecord::Associations::CollectionProxy by calling Ruby’s original class method on the object in question: Object.instance_method(:class).bind(c1.articles).call. This is a nice trick to verify that the object is not trying to pretend to be of a different class.
回答2:
Because when you define association, it places in your model:
def #{name}(*args)
association(:#{name}).reader(*args)
end
.reader() returns AssociationProxy, which removes the .class method and delegates unknown methods to @target through .method_missing.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14065425/why-are-rails-model-association-results-not-naturally-activerecordrelations