Paul McNett wrote:
> On 4/2/10 3:19 PM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
>
>> Ed Leafe wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 2, 2010, at 3:53 PM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi, in the PyCon Tutorial in the section "Creating the Many:Many
>>>> Relationship between Recipes and Categories" when adding the
>>>> CklCategories control to the PagEditRecipes the code reads :
>>>>
>>>> 79 mainSizer.insert(0, gs, 1, "expand", border=20,
>>>> borderSides=("top", "bottom", "left"))
>>>>
>>>> I think it should read :
>>>>
>>>> 79 mainSizer.insert(0, gs, "expand", 1, border=20,
>>>> borderSides=("top", "bottom", "left"))
>>>>
>>>> Because checking the API, layout comes before proportion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You are correct, but that's one of the little magic things that we do
>>> under the hood. Layout is a string, while proportion is an integer, so if
>>> the method receives them reversed, it will figure out what you really
>>> meant. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Ok, thanks.
>>
>> New question (it is one of those days ;cP). At the end of this section,
>> after adding the methods to save changes in CategoriesForRecipe(), it is
>> stated
>> """
>>
>> I also chose to save() the new record in line 50. Dabo's delete()
>> already commits immediately to the backend, so we may as well make
>> save() immediate in this context, too. It wouldn't make sense to the
>> user that unchecking a category saves the change immediately, while
>> checking a category requires an explicit save().
>>
>> """
>> This is correct, it is what the code does, but I think it is
>> inconsistent with the rest of the form. You see, the user can change
>> many recipes at will but nothing will be saved (in recipes) till he
>> clicks the save button, but on the other hand whatever he does linking a
>> category to a recipe gets automatically saved. The result is that if the
>> user performs a series of changes to the recipes (including adding or
>> deleting links to categories) and then chooses not to save, the changes
>> will not be completely undone as the linking to categories can not be
>> undone.
>>
>
> I know, it is inconsistent. But I didn't know what to do given the
> inconsistency
> between new() and delete() in Dabo (the latter implicitly commits, while the
> former
> doesn't). I guess I could have managed the category linking in my own
> structure
> instead of keeping them in the bizobj, and then created code to run on save()
> to get
> the category information linked up.
>
> Paul
>
What about enclosing everything between saves in a transaction, and
having a cancel changes button which would roll it back? And it would
make a good teaching on how to control transactions from within Dabo.
I'd love to see how it is done. Can't take up too much coding to do it.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]
