For now I have committed a fix in trunk. I am not sure it belong there? It is not obvious to me the previous behavior was better or not (the feature you are using was never documented).
Pros? Cons? On Tuesday, 28 August 2012 11:56:13 UTC-5, Richard wrote: > > FYI what you suggest trigger this error message : > > <type 'exceptions.SyntaxError'> Object exists and cannot be redefined: id > > Richard > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Richard Vézina > <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Not sure I follow, in the pass we were allowed to define a legacy id for >> a table like this : >> >> db.define_table('test_endotoxin', >> *Field('something_id','id'),* >> Field('result','decimal(10,2)', >> notnull=True, >> requires=[IS_NOT_EMPTY(error_message=T('field can\'t be empty')), >> IS_DECIMAL_IN_RANGE(0.00,99999999.99)], >> required=True >> ), >> ...) >> >> It still work except at the level of the row object. >> >> What you suggest may works, I would have to refactor and create a virtual >> field for all my tables... >> I was seeking for a solution that prevent me from refactoring in order to >> shift from 1.99.4 to 2.0... when there will be a stable version. >> >> Richard >> >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Massimo Di Pierro < >> [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> How about >>> >>> table.id = Field.Virtual(lambda row: row.table.something_id) >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, 28 August 2012 10:30:37 UTC-5, Richard wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello Massimo, >>>> >>>> I notice when I try to migrate to 1.99.7 some times ago that I could >>>> not anymore do something like this : >>>> >>>> rows = db(db.table.id>0).select() >>>> >>>> for row in rows: >>>> print row.id >>>> >>>> I can did it before 1.99.5. >>>> >>>> Has Anthony wrote in this thread : https://groups.google.com/** >>>> forum/#!msg/web2py/**i7wx6JVTOtw/FRnScZzhqHgJ<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/web2py/i7wx6JVTOtw/FRnScZzhqHgJ> >>>> >>>> We still can do : >>>> >>>> db.table.id even if the "real" table id name (or legacy id name) is >>>> something else like : something_id >>>> >>>> To me it is just a matter to have a alias for any legacy id name when >>>> creating a row object : >>>> >>>> Row in 1.99.4 >>>> <Row {'something_id': 252, 'update_record': <function <lambda> at >>>> 0x215eaa0>, 'field1': Decimal('5.55'), *'id': 252*, 'delete_record': >>>> <function <lambda> at 0x215eb18>}> >>>> >>>> >>>> Row in 1.99.5-1.99.7 >>>> <Row {'something_id': 252, 'update_record': <function <lambda> at >>>> 0x215eaa0>, 'field1': Decimal('5.55'), 'delete_record': <function <lambda> >>>> at 0x215eb18>}> >>>> >>>> Could we have it back or it is gone? >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > --
