User-centric Routing in Rails 3
Have you ever noticed that the GitHub homepage is different once you log in? I’m not talking about little changes here and there. It’s a completely different page. I have no idea how GitHub does this but I’ll venture a guess and demonstrate how to achieve the same effect.
Update: How to write user-centric routes in Rails 2
There are several common ways to pull this off but many miss the mark.
In the View
Switching content based on the current user is easy enough in the view. After all, current_user is available in the view so why not?
<% if current_user %> <p>Welcome back, <%= current_user.name %>!</p> <% else %> <%= link_to "Learn about us!", about_path %> <% end %>
But this falls apart when more user-specific information is needed in the view. In the case of GitHub’s user homepage, a lot of extra information (repositories, activity, etc.) is included. This information should be loaded up in the controller. So maybe that’s where the content switch belongs.
In the Controller
With the content switch in the controller, an action might look like this:
def home
if current_user
@feed_entries = current_user.feed_entries
render :private_home
else
render :public_home
end
end
This too feels just a little bit… off. The responsibility of a controller action is to load a dataset from the models and to render a template from the views. So if, depending on whether a user is logged in, an action loads up one of two datasets and renders one of two templates, shouldn’t that action be split into two actions? The question, then, is where do we switch between two actions?
In the Routes!
If you think about it, we do this all the time with REST. The same resource route can map to multiple actions depending the request’s HTTP method. A homepage could be mapped to two actions with:
root :to => "users#show", :via => :get root :to => "users#create", :via => :post
But how can the routes access whether a user is logged in?
Rails has had routing constraints for some time but Rails 3 introduced request-based and advanced constraints. An advanced constraint is a custom object with a matches? method that receives the request as an argument.
In this case, I’m storing a unique user token in the cookies when a user is logged in. So in lib/logged_in_constraint.rb, I can write my constraint class to check for that token:
class LoggedInConstraint < Struct.new(:value)
def matches?(request)
request.cookies.key?("user_token") == value
end
end
I also need to require the new constraint in config/routes.rb:
require File.expand_path("../../lib/logged_in_constraint", __FILE__)
The Fun Part
Now I can write my two new, GitHub-style homepage routes:
root :to => "static#home", :constraints => LoggedInConstraint.new(false) root :to => "users#show", :constraints => LoggedInConstraint.new(true)
And that’s it! Give it a shot.
This is just one application of the new Rails 3 request-based constraints and there is no shortage of other fun and interesting applications:
root :to => "static#welcome_to_holland", :constraints => GeolocationConstraint.new("Holland, Michigan")
root :to => "static#visit_holland"
Enjoy!
21 Comments
Stephen May 31, 2011
I tried to follow this but when I launch “rails s”, I get “uninitialized constant LoggedInConstraintn (NameError)”
Mike Wyatt May 31, 2011
wouldn’t it now be possible to open firebug/ developer tools, set a cookie with JavaScript and trick the app?
Steve Richert May 31, 2011 http://collectiveidea.com
Stephen: Good catch! My application includes lib in its autoload_paths. Otherwise, the lib/logged_in_constraint.rb file should be required in your routes. Post updated!
Mike: Absolutely. This technique is meant only for smart routing, not secure authentication. If a cookie were forged, your authentication system should handle that in your users#show action.
Mike Wyatt May 31, 2011
just seems like a lot of baggage for what is basically
def index user_signed_in? ? _public : _private end
Zach Moazeni May 31, 2011 http://collectiveidea.com
@Mike that works for a couple actions, but breaks down quickly when you have a number of them. Your example only renders views, and quite often your meaty actions will grow a lot larger when you support multiple user roles. Steve’s strategy is a lot more versatile than just an if/else.
Evan June 01, 2011
Not directly related, but somewhat relevant: this is how I do the same thing with Devise & Warden:
root :to => “users#dashboard”, :constraints => lambda { |r| r.env[“warden”].authenticate? }
root :to => “home#index”
Zach Moazeni June 01, 2011 http://collectiveidea.com
@Evan Nice! I didn’t know you could pass a lambda to :constraints. A lot cleaner.
Brandon June 01, 2011 http://extrast.com
@Evan
That is a great solution and really clean. The only problem that I have with a lot of these solutions is that it really puts a lot of logic in routes.rb, whereas Steve’s solution keeps the logic separate.
Rahul June 01, 2011
Very well done, Thanks for sharing this.
Behrang June 02, 2011 http://www.behrang.org/en/blog
There’s something wrong about the JS for this page. I think too many events are fired when the content is scrolled up and down and as such it’s very sluggish.
Jetsin July 11, 2011 http://www.yahoo.com/
I might be beiatng a dead horse, but thank you for posting this!
Steve July 17, 2011 http://steveklabnik.com
This appears to be broken as of Rails 3.1.rc4. I get No route matches [GET] “/” when I add the constraint. Laaame.
Chris September 02, 2011 http://chris.com
With Devise, same thing can be achieved with
match ‘/dashboard’, :to => ‘User#dashboard’, :as => :user_root
Seth Vargo December 16, 2011 http://sethvargo.com
For those of you using sessions instead of cookies, you can access
request.session[:your_key]
in a proc
Marjan Povolni May 10, 2012 http://github.com/mamarjan
I’m using omniauth with the identity strategy, and had to somewhat change the match? method with so it’s contents looks like this:
request.env[“rack.session”].key?(“user_id”) == value
Larry May 17, 2012
Thanks a lot for sharing. I build a constraint exactly like yours following your blog. It runs great in development, but when I run autotest, there’s a error raised: TypeError: superclass mismatch for class LoggedInConstraint
Do you happen to know that? Thank you very much!
Steve Richert May 18, 2012 http://collectiveidea.com
@Larry, superclass mismatches occur when you try to open or define a class that’s already been defined with a different superclass. Because it’s only happening in your tests, you’re probably extending your constraint class in a test support file without properly specifying its superclass. Rather than opening the class, you could instead:
or:
Larry June 04, 2012
@Steve, Thanks for your responds Steve. I am still confused, I didn’t write any test for class LoggedInConstraint in rspec. In whole projects there’s only in lib/ and in config/routes where LoggedInConstraint appears. Is there other causes to this problem? or..maybe I take your reply in a wrong way?
Leonarda Rover August 10, 2012 http://[url=freeconsumerreviews.org/orgreenic-reviews/]orgreenic pan[/url]
I am often to blogging and i really appreciate your content. The article has really peaks my interest. I am going to bookmark your site and keep checking for new information
orgreenic cookware
I still do not believe that the Pirates jumped that hard for Sanchez, but he was the top catcher in the first round by far.
Ever since that one kid got hurt right before the Draft and needed Tommy John’s surgery, the draft went away from the catching corps.
I think sometimes kids fall through the cracks, and maybe Washington did, but that is a minority, and not the majority in the draft.
Simon September 13, 2012 http://polkaspots.com
Just integrated this into our app. Much appreciated guys :)
Stewart Johnson April 15, 2013 http://sprangles.com
This was very helpful – thanks!
Post a Comment