On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Paul Leader <
pa...@paulleader.co.uk> wrote:
> Perhaps I'm bing a bit thick and missing something obvious (possible), but I
> found the caveats listed in section 3.5 of the Associations Rails Guide
> badly worded and confusing.
>
> The section gives an example with a has_many <-> belongs_to relationship is
> setup with inverse associations on both side, but then states the caveat
> "For belongs_to associations, has_many inverse associations are ignored."
>
> Could someone actually explain what that means in concrete terms? The
> example and the caveat appear to be contradictory. If the caveat is correct
> then I'm not sure I understand how the example works.
I've never needed :inverse_of. Looks like academic masturbation to me.
--
Greg Donald