Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7762009
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 1, 20262026-06-01T14:16:52+00:00 2026-06-01T14:16:52+00:00

If I have a scope with a lambda and it takes an argument, depending

  • 0

If I have a scope with a lambda and it takes an argument, depending on the value of the argument, I might know that there will not be any matches, but I still want to return a relation, not an empty array:

scope :for_users, lambda { |users| users.any? ? where("user_id IN (?)", users.map(&:id).join(',')) : [] }

What I really want is a “none” method, the opposite of “all”, that returns a relation that can still be chained, but results in the query being short-circuited.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-01T14:16:53+00:00Added an answer on June 1, 2026 at 2:16 pm

    There is a now a “correct” mechanism in Rails 4:

    >> Model.none 
    => #<ActiveRecord::Relation []>
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have the following scope, which I know is not optimal: scope :event_stream_for, lambda{
I have model like this: scope :search_posts, lambda { |query| mega_posts.where( title LIKE ?
I have the following named scope: named_scope :report_search, lambda { |search| { :conditions =>
The scope of this is that we have three main projects. Some of the
I have a named_scope in rails that finds episodes by there directors given name
Using Rails 3 active relation, I have a scope: scope :duplicate_contact, lambda {|contact| where(
Have a query that is failing because the scope is running a query like
I have this scope: scope :search, lambda {|q| where(name LIKE ?, %#{q}%) } However,
I have: scope :all_somethings, lambda { find(:all) } But this returns an array (and
I have a scope scope :with_tags, lambda {|tag| joins(:tags).where('tags.name in ( ? )',tag )}

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.