Comments on: The Rails State Machine http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/ Internet Awesome Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:17:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Steve http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1345 Steve Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:46:57 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1345 @tonymi -- apparently Jeremy took it out, saying something to the effect "a StateMachine implementation is not needed -- you can just use Ruby". Not exactly sure what he means by this though... @tonymi — apparently Jeremy took it out, saying something to the effect “a StateMachine implementation is not needed — you can just use Ruby”. Not exactly sure what he means by this though…

]]> By: almost effortless » Weekly Digest, 8-10-09 http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1270 almost effortless » Weekly Digest, 8-10-09 Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:50:30 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1270 [...] The Rails State Machine Ruby on Rails recently added a built-in ActiveModel::StateMachine implementation and even more recently tied it in to ActiveRecord. And, for being a built-in library, it’s pretty damned fully-featured. [...] [...] The Rails State Machine Ruby on Rails recently added a built-in ActiveModel::StateMachine implementation and even more recently tied it in to ActiveRecord. And, for being a built-in library, it’s pretty damned fully-featured. [...]

]]> By: tonymi http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1134 tonymi Sun, 07 Feb 2010 16:30:41 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1134 As per the rails 3.0 beta release notes ActiveRecord::StateMachine has been removed from the rails 3.0 release. Does anyone know whether this module will be released as a separate gem? As per the rails 3.0 beta release notes ActiveRecord::StateMachine has been removed from the rails 3.0 release. Does anyone know whether this module will be released as a separate gem?

]]> By: carlivar http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1124 carlivar Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:29:35 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1124 This looks great but I too am wondering if I should wait for a 2.3.x minor release or if this is a 3.0 feature. I spent a little while trying to find that information with no luck. This looks great but I too am wondering if I should wait for a 2.3.x minor release or if this is a 3.0 feature. I spent a little while trying to find that information with no luck.

]]> By: Keith Pitt http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1112 Keith Pitt Fri, 22 Jan 2010 00:25:14 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1112 I don't get why people are complaining about why its in core... Its not a big deal! It's a mixin! Its not in by default, it doesn't bloat anything, its just an extra piece of love that you can use if you want. Every project I've ever done needed a state machine, one way or another - so I welcome this functionality with open arms. I don’t get why people are complaining about why its in core… Its not a big deal! It’s a mixin! Its not in by default, it doesn’t bloat anything, its just an extra piece of love that you can use if you want. Every project I’ve ever done needed a state machine, one way or another – so I welcome this functionality with open arms.

]]> By: Casey Helbling http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-1037 Casey Helbling Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:08:25 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-1037 Any update about when this is slated for release - 3.0? Where is the official 'timeline' for release feature sets - lighthouse? Any update about when this is slated for release – 3.0? Where is the official ‘timeline’ for release feature sets – lighthouse?

]]> By: Daniel Cadenas http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-656 Daniel Cadenas Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:23:11 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-656 Here you have a state pattern based alternative that integrates with ActiveRecord: http://github.com/dcadenas/active_record_state_pattern The library intentionally follows the classic state pattern implementation (no state mixins, classical delegation to simple state classes, etc.) believing that by doing so we increase flexibility (internal DSL constraints vs plain object oriented Ruby power), simplicity and clarity. Here you have a state pattern based alternative that integrates with ActiveRecord: http://github.com/dcadenas/active_record_state_pattern

The library intentionally follows the classic state pattern implementation (no state mixins, classical delegation to simple state classes, etc.) believing that by doing so we increase flexibility (internal DSL constraints vs plain object oriented Ruby power), simplicity and clarity.

]]> By: lobo_tuerto http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-610 lobo_tuerto Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:05:16 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-610 I also agree that this little utility should be in the core. Come on, you always end up needing a state machine, one way or another. I also agree that this little utility should be in the core. Come on, you always end up needing a state machine, one way or another.

]]> By: Seth Ladd http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-604 Seth Ladd Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:11:28 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-604 It appears that as of Rails 2.3.4 this functionality is not included. Is this slated for 2.3.x or 3.0 ? It appears that as of Rails 2.3.4 this functionality is not included. Is this slated for 2.3.x or 3.0 ?

]]> By: Silas Baronda http://blog.envylabs.com/2009/08/the-rails-state-machine/#comment-352 Silas Baronda Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:54:04 +0000 http://blog.envylabs.com/?p=161#comment-352 Actually I was incorrect. ActiveModel isn't persistent while ActiveRecord is. Actually I was incorrect. ActiveModel isn’t persistent while ActiveRecord is.

]]>