For the HashAlignment rule, we're using the default `key` style (keys are aligned and values aren't) instead of the `table` style (both keys and values are aligned) because, even if we used both in the application, we used the `key` style a lot more. Furthermore, the `table` style looks strange in places where there are both very long and very short keys and sometimes we weren't even consistent with the `table` style, aligning some keys without aligning other keys. Ideally we could align hashes to "either key or table", so developers can decide whether keeping the symmetry of the code is worth it in a case-per-case basis, but Rubocop doesn't allow this option.
48 lines
1.3 KiB
Ruby
48 lines
1.3 KiB
Ruby
module BudgetsHelper
|
|
def csv_params
|
|
csv_params = params.clone.merge(format: :csv)
|
|
csv_params = csv_params.to_unsafe_h.transform_keys(&:to_sym)
|
|
csv_params.delete(:page)
|
|
csv_params
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def namespaced_budget_investment_path(investment, options = {})
|
|
case namespace
|
|
when "management"
|
|
management_budget_investment_path(investment.budget, investment, options)
|
|
else
|
|
budget_investment_path(investment.budget, investment, options)
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def css_for_ballot_heading(heading)
|
|
current_ballot&.has_lines_in_heading?(heading) ? "is-active" : ""
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def current_ballot
|
|
Budget::Ballot.find_by(user: current_user, budget: @budget)
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def unfeasible_or_unselected_filter
|
|
["unselected", "unfeasible"].include?(@current_filter)
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def budget_published?(budget)
|
|
budget.published? || current_user&.administrator?
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
def budget_subnav_items_for(budget)
|
|
{
|
|
results: t("budgets.results.link"),
|
|
stats: t("stats.budgets.link"),
|
|
executions: t("budgets.executions.link")
|
|
}.select { |section, _| can?(:"read_#{section}", budget) }.map do |section, text|
|
|
{
|
|
text: text,
|
|
url: send("budget_#{section}_path", budget),
|
|
active: controller_name == section.to_s
|
|
}
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
end
|