dewetblomerus
I have a resource that belongs_to a User.
When I create one with my code_interface I pass in a user_id.
I want to start creating code interfaces for querying the resources belonging to that user, I can again pass in user_id.
However, when I look at the code generated by ash_phoenix.gen.live I see this beauty:
AshPhoenix.Form.for_create(Red.Api.Attempt, :create,
api: Red.Api,
as: "attempt",
actor: socket.assigns.current_user
)
Instead of passing in the user_id, I just pass in the user as an actor.
What is the convention here? (Please don’t tell me to do whatever I feel like, I feel like learning the conventional/idiomatic Ash way of doing this).
If the convention is to pass in an actor in the code interface. Please share a link to an example if possible.
Trending in Questions
Hello!
Suppose you are building workflow (order / task / payment) processing system with the following requirements:
Each workflow con...
New
I’m in search of an Elixir library that offers PDF generation capabilities similar to Ruby’s Prawn. While there have been discussions abo...
New
Hey guys,
I’ve got a huge CSV ( around 10 GB ) that needs to be processed hourly
Do you guys have any suggestions what is the best prac...
New
Kia ora,
We have been using elixir-google-api to connect to Google Drive. However, with the updates to Tesla due to CVEs this is now bro...
New
Hello!
Could someone please give me a help/sample code, how to delete a file from s3 using waffle/waffle_ecto from Phoenix app.
I creat...
New
I’ve followed the Phoenix LiveView file upload code here Uploads — Phoenix LiveView v1.0.0-rc.7 and so far everything works just fine wit...
New
I have what I’ve heard referred to as a “lookup table” in my database. This is a way of assigning codes to common values. One common lo...
New
Other Trending Topics
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language.
Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
ExRatatui lets you cook up rich terminal UIs in Elixir, powered by Rust’s ratatui via Rustler NIFs. Build interactive terminal applicatio...
New
Corex is an accessible, unstyled UI component library for Phoenix that integrates Zag.js state machines using Vanilla JavaScript and Live...
New
Hello everyone. After busy few months I am happy to announce v0.1.0 of Emerge & Solve.
They are GUI (Emerge) and State management (S...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #deployment
- #library
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #channels
- #elixirconf
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #javascript
- #podcasts
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixir-ls
- #blog-post
- #ai
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #elixirconf-us
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #hex
- #security
- #metaprogramming










Showing Posts 1 to 8- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
dewetblomerus
I have not set up any policies or looked at those, if that or something entirely different is the conventional way of scoping a query to a specific user, I can go down that road too.
zachdaniel
The general pattern is to first ask yourself what kind of action you are writing. If you are writing the sort of action that is “contextual to the actor”, i.e. “create_my_thing”. vs “create_thing_for_user”. They are subtly different, and in many cases you may have both. I.e some admin version of an action that allows supplying any user.
Generally speaking, your best bet is to start by preferring to use the actor, and if later you determine that you want someone to be able to take that action “on behalf of” another user, you can either add another version of the action, or modify the internals of the action to expect an actor or a supplied user_id (for example).
All code interface functions accept an
actoroption, i.eYourResource.create!(...., actor: actor).So to sum up, prefer to write “actor-specific” actions (as you described), as they are easier to reason about.
dewetblomerus
That is exactly what I needed
Thank you, Zack.
dewetblomerus
Now that I know what I’m trying to do, I still can’t figure out how. There is only one example in the documentation, and it does not how how to make use of the built-in options.
Here is the resource:
What I was able to make work
It’s not what I want because I had to make the
belongs_toattribute_writeable?: truewhich I don’t need at this point (not yet assigning cards to someone else).But it fails when
I try to remove the
attribute_writable?: trueand pass theactoroption,Here is the error:
How do I fix this?
zachdaniel
right, so now what you need to do is use the current user in the action to map it to the
userrelationship in some way.The long way:
The built in way:
dewetblomerus
Badabing Badaboom
This worked:
I was able to remove the
attribute_writable?: truefrom the relationship.And now this works:
zachdaniel
Ah, you likely want this to be only in a specific action, i.e
If it is in global changes, it will happen on all create and update actions.
dewetblomerus
Oh gotcha! Thanks for clarifying. I did that and it works.
Here’s my whole Resource now, just in case someone else is wanting a complete example:
I can’t guarantee that this file will keep living here, but if someone wants to see the up-to-date changes: red/lib/red/practice/resources/card.ex at main · dewetblomerus/red · GitHub