>
> You can extract this information from the _meta attribute on a model.
> This isn't documented (yet), but it's on the TODO list for things to
> document before 1.0.
>
thanks, i will check out this _meta attribute.
it seems to me that ManyToManyField is not a field, it is a table. so
if we did not have this field we could still implement this kind of
relationship by introducing a model with two foreign keys (using my
original example):
class Assoc(models.Model):
a = models.ForeignKey('A')
b = models.ForeignKey('B')
but this would result in A and B types not having the helper accessor
methods returning the corresponding sets from the relation. but this
can be solved by introducing a new method that takes a pair of models
(let us call it Pair):
class Assoc(models.Model):
ab = models.Pair(A, B)
this could do just the same as ManyToManyField and create the accessor
methods that return association sets on A and B.
having a separate model for the associations table will allow us to
count associatons easily. whereas right now, unless i have missed
something, we can only count associations that belong to a particular
object. unless we use explicit sql code as shown above.
also, i think QuerySets need a (lazy) join method that would return a
new QuerySet. to be efficient the ORM needs to be as close as possible
to the database query language. i think.
konstantin
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
