Missing relations in new (cloned) model about deep_cloneable

[moiristo]

What kind of association are we talking about? Did it clone the categories? Are the products still missing after saving the copy?

[joshleitzel]

I've come across this issue as well, and it seems to be due to the use of a multi-item hash inside the include array. The deep_clone method appears to accept these formats:

record.deep_clone(include: { relation1: :attr1, relation2: :attr2 })

record.deep_clone(include: [:relation3, { relation1: :attr1 }, { relation2: :attr2 }])

but does not support using a single hash inside the array if it has multiple keys:

record.deep_clone(include: [:relation3, { relation1: :attr1, relation2: :attr2 }])

record.deep_clone(include: [:relation3, relation1: :attr1, relation2: :attr2])

I agree this is a tad confusing/unexpected since the last format would be the more idiomatic way to write this in Rails these days. I toyed around for a bit with the code but couldn't find a way to make this work without breaking some of the other use cases, but here's a test to show the problem:

def test_multiple_and_deep_include_association_with_array
  deep_clone = @jack.deep_clone(include: [:parrot, treasures: :gold_pieces, mateys: {}])
  assert deep_clone.new_record?
  assert deep_clone.save
  assert_equal 1, deep_clone.treasures.size
  assert_equal 1, deep_clone.gold_pieces.size
  assert_equal 1, deep_clone.mateys.size
end

For now, the second format I showed above (with explicitly separate hashes) can be used if you want to mix array and hash relations.

PS: Thank you for this wonderful gem. It's helped me greatly optimize a tedious workflow in one of my projects. :)

[moiristo]

Thanks! I'll check it out soon, should be fixable I think..

[moiristo]

I fixed the test now in 517537d by 'normalizing' the includes list (converting multikey hashes to singular hashes). Should be ok I think?