Re: Question on passing user to model objects

[Scoox]

Hi Daniel,

> However, calling foo.bar_set multiple times does *not* get the same
> queryset each time.
Okay, that was new to me :-)... Do you know what the reason for that
is?


> I discuss this a little in a blog
> entry 
> here:http://blog.roseman.org.uk/2010/01/11/django-patterns-part-2-efficien...
Thanks! I thank that is exactly what I want to achieve. I changed
_related_items to related_items (else Django would give me an error).

The data should now be correct.

I have a little problem passing the dict to the template though. When
I did so, the template would have the keys - not the actual values.

I also added:
obj_arr=[]
for key, obj in obj_dict.items():
obj_arr.append(obj)

It's not very beautiful, but keeps the designer from using {% for
key,value in dictionary.items %}{{ value }}{% endfor %}


> Does this necessarily need to be a model method? Why not a custom
> template tag or filter, that you can pass the request.user object to?
Then the filter would have to be inserted everywhere where any of the
object's attributes should be shown (the edit button is shown for each
visible attribute).




Thanks a lot!
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Re: Question on passing user to model objects

[Scoox]

> >     isEditable=0
> >     login=0
>
> Assuming these two previous lines are at the top-level of you class
> statement, both attributes will be class-attributes (that is "shared
> by all instances"). I don't think this is what you want.
Yes but that's what I intended. They should (and do) not all have the
same value, but every instance of the object should have access to the
user. Ideally I would have a static user class holding the current
user (or global variable), but unfortunately I could not get that to
work.

> >     def editable(self):
> >         if self.login==0: return False
> >         else:
> >             if self.isEditable!=0: return self.isEditable
> >             if self==self.login.get_profile():
>
> Are you sure you want to compare the current whatever instance with a
> profile ???

Nope, absolutly not :-). That should mean self.user instead of self.
In the company self is right since it extends the user, but here I
changed it.


> >                 self.isEditable=True
> >                 for o in self.offer_set.all(): o.editable=True
>
> Such a side-effect is really really bad practice (and, in this case,
> mostly useless).
I agree it's kind of bad.


> >                 return True
> >             else:
> >                 self.isEditable=False
> >                 return False
>
> Code depending on the request.user should either takes an user as
> param or live elsewhere.

I will put it somewhere else. I guess you mean because the code is re-
used twice.


> > (I added the isEditable attribute to cache if the object is editable,
> > since I wasn't sure if get_profile() is lazy loaded or sends a request
> > to the db with each iteration)
>
> When you aren't sure, check, don't wildguess.

Will do as soon as I am a little more used to Django.

> > Yes that sounds possible. Just wondering if there is a cleaner way to
> > do it - the ideal way would of course every object having access to
> > the user in some way, but that seems impossible.
>
> Indeed. How would your code work in another environnment (command line
> tool for example) else ?

There it worked fine (the original version, as you stated this one had
a bug). So it really must be the a different queryset.

> wrt/ "a cleaner way to do it", your business rules are not clear
> enough to come with a sensible answer.

What I am trying to archive is rather simple - I just did not figure
out a simple and clean way to do it:

I have the company and offer objects. Each offer belongs to a company
which belongs to a user. Whatever user is logged in should see an
"edit" link on the live site, whenever his own company or offers come
up. Anoynmous users should not see any edit links.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Re: Question on passing user to model objects

[Scoox]

Hi Daniel,
thanks for your answer. Sorry, cmp should be c. I tried to only give
the import parts to make it more readable, but I made a mistake there.
The model code is pretty standard, except for one function:

isEditable=0
login=0
def editable(self):
if self.login==0: return False
else:
if self.isEditable!=0: return self.isEditable
if self==self.login.get_profile():
self.isEditable=True
for o in self.offer_set.all(): o.editable=True
return True
else:
self.isEditable=False
return False

(I added the isEditable attribute to cache if the object is editable,
since I wasn't sure if get_profile() is lazy loaded or sends a request
to the db with each iteration)

>> But the issue is likely to be that each call to foo_set.all() creates a
>> brand new queryset fetched straight from the database. So doing
>> something on the result of calling .all() in the view is irrelevant
>> when you call .all again in the template.

That's probably right. But from what I understood, all() is a lazy
loader, so when Django loaded the objects once out of the db, it
should not do that again when the same object is called in a template.
Or did I understand that wrong?

>> The best way to do this is probably to keep the queryset in a variable
>> and send it explicitly to the template, then iterate through that
Yes that sounds possible. Just wondering if there is a cleaner way to
do it - the ideal way would of course every object having access to
the user in some way, but that seems impossible.



Kind Regards
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Re: Rendering a field value in a custom way

[Scoox]

Hi Wayne,
thanks for your answer.

I now created a function that applies the render functions dynamically
to the object. So get_* is automagically created.

You are right about the downsides of this approach. However my
designer really does not like filters, so I have to stick to the
approach.


Kind Regards
Scoox

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Question on passing user to model objects

[Scoox]

Hi guys,
I have a (probably easy) question.

I need to pass the logged in user to my objects.

I have the objects company and offer.

I tried the following on the project's index / start view:

c = Company.objects.all()
cmp.login=request.user
for j in cmp.offer_set.all():
j.company.login=request.user
   return render_to_response('show/startseite.html', {'company':
c},context_instance=RequestContext(request))

This works fine for the company objects. However, it does *not* for
the offer objects.

For whatever reason, even though it should be available, the offer's
user attribute is 0 (it's initial value).

The template is like this (shortened to cover only import points):

{% if company.editable %}(... user has edit rights - this works){%endif
%}

{% if company.offer_set.all %}
{% for item in company.offer_set.all %}
{% if journey.editable %} *** does not work ***

Strange enough, when I display the vars:
C: {{company.editable}} / OC: {{offer.company.editable}} / O:
{{offer.editable}}

I get
C: true / OC: false / O: false


So for whatever reason company does not seem to be the same as
offer.company, although it is in the same loop.



How could I solve this problem? Is there a suggested way to pass the
logged in user to all objects?



Kind Regards and thanks
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Re: Rendering a field value in a custom way

[Scoox]

Okay, I *think* I figured out a way to fix this.

I can add methods such as get_stars to the relevant model.

Then in that method I can do whatever I like with the string (e.g.
convert it to star symbols).


Would that be the recommended way to do this?


Kind Regards
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Re: Rendering a field value in a custom way

[Scoox]

Note: Why do I not to use filters?

1. It's nicer if the designer doesn't always have to put |(...) behind
the field name.
2. I do not know how to access the object passed in the filter. E.g.
if I use {{rating.stars|muBeautify}} the muBeautify filter would only
get a unicode "5", but how would it know which field that is gained
from? It needs to know that the values given comes from rating.stars,
since it should different results if e.g. rating.percent is used.

I could write different filters for each, but then there would be ~ 30
filters for the designer to memorize.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Rendering a field value in a custom way

[Scoox]

Hi guys,
I want to be able to render a custom field.

It's supposed to extend a normal char field. I want to place certain
content in front of the field, depending upon the fields value.

As an example take a simple field that allows entering a number.
Instead of displaying the number, I would like to display star symbols
(e.g. entering 5 would return 5 star symbols when rendered in
templates).

Can I do that by extending the field? I do not want to setup any
template extensions, I want the field to act like that naturally.

I tried overwriting the field like this:


class inPlaceCharField(models.CharField):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
self.widget = ReCaptcha
self.required = True
super(models.CharField, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
def render(self):
return ";;;"
def __unicode__(self):
return "123"
def __str__(self):
return "1234"
def value_to_string(self, obj):
value = self._get_val_from_obj(obj)
return "12345"


But none of them worked - I always get the field's value rendered.
Which function do I need to overwrite?



Kind Regards and thanks for your answer in advance
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.

Beginner question on admin interface

[Scoox]

Hi guys,
I hope this has not been asked yet, it's a total beginner question.

After finally getting Django and PyDev set up on my windows machine, I
am now going through the tutorial.

I am planning a kind of black board, where users can post entries
including things such as images.

Now my question is: Does it make sense to use the standard Django
admin here, or is it better to write your own admin?

Things I need are
- Self-Registration with e-mail validation
- Approval process (meaning if a user wants to post sth., I want to
approve it before it gets published)
- Neat Ajax Interface - e.g. the user should be able to upload as many
pictures as he want to, and when he does so each picture should be
showed as thumbnail right in the edit page. In the tutorial this would
mean that the user can not only add 3 choises to a poll, but an
unlimited number of choices.
- Does the admin interface some kind of tagging input? E.g. in some
blog software you can enter a word and it will offer similar tags
while typing.


Okay, honestly I believe it will be easier to go from scratch. However
I'd still like to ask, since the idea of having an almost-done admin
interface is very neat.



Kind Regards
Stephan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@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.