Thanks. Before I suggest anything concrete for the docs, let's see if my understanding is now right:
The problem from my point of view was that I didn't think I had any hidden fields. Hence I didn't loop over them, and didn't think of them - yes, despite the massive hint in the error message ... :-( I think the hidden field in question was in fact the id of the instance (which exists for the previously saved objects) and was zero for a "blank" form in the formset ... and I think this only shows up as an issue when looping over forms in a formset, because the formset machinery has set up, modified, and uses this hidden field - and I didn't know it was there. (Or is it always there for anything generated by a ModelForm, and I've never spotted it because I always get my id from my url?) (Is this really an edge case? It seems like something one would want to do for nearly any interesting formset ... lay it out nicely ...) Cheers Bryan On Aug 11, 9:45 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <malc...@pointy-stick.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 01:12 -0700,bnlwrote: > > [...] > > > Apologies that I'm not asking my questions in the way you'd like, > > but believe me, I am cutting it down a lot ... and I appreciate that > > it's still not obvious where the errors are (I would have found > > them otherwise). In this case, I had cut it down to just field, and > > it > > exhibited the problem ... I shouldn't have included the extra line > > which was just to show why I wanted to do it ... > > Trimming a problem report to the minimum required and no further is part > science and part black art, so there are going to be times when you just > get unlucky. In this case, however, the problem is you aren't including > details so that I or anybody else can actually reproduce the problem. So > you end up in a position where you have to hope the particular error > message triggers a "we've seen that before" thought in somebody's head. > > A good problem report or request for help contains enough information to > repeat the problem. Which means, in this case, the form class containing > the field. > > > > > It would seem that the advice to loop over hidden fields in the > > template could be promoted to the documentation. > > Well, we already document, in the main formset documentation, including > the management form if you're doing manual template layout > (http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/forms/formsets/#using-a-f...) > and we document including hidden fields if you're doing iteration over form > fields, in the main forms documentation, > (http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/forms/#looping-over-hidde...) so > this isn't undocumented territory. > > However, if you feel there's a clearer way to do this without giving it > undue prominence -- bearing in mind it's an edge case, so shouldn't > obscure the more regular usage cases or weigh those sections down with > heavy details -- then please do create a patch and attach it to a > ticket. Many of our documentation improvements are generated by people > trying to make something clearer. > > Regards, > Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
