> So - show me what it would look like. Show me how I, as a third party,
> would use your proposed syntax to define output that would match
> Django's existing serialization scheme. Yes, this serialization format
> will exist as a built in default; but I should be able to reproduce
> that format in my own code if I want.
# Fair enough.
if code > literacy: # here
so_be_it()
class DefaultSerializedField(object):
belongs_to = "field"
as_tag = true
class DefaultSerializedSpecialField(DefaultSerializedField):
" For pk and modelname "
belongs_to = None
as_tag = false
class DefaultSerializedModel(object):
exclude = []
fields = None
def __init__(self,embed_level):
self.embed_level = embed_level
#Somewhere in the dark forest of BaseSerializer implemented
if not config_is_passed_as_an_arg:
config = DefaultSerializedModel(embed_level=0)
for item in queryset:
pk_config = getattr(config, 'pk', DefaultSerializedSpecialField())
self.process_pk(pk_config)
mn_config = getattr(config, 'modelname',
DefaultSerializedSpecialField())
self.process_model_name(mn_config)
fields = getattr(config, 'fields',())
for name, field_config in fields.:
if not name_of(field) in item.exclude:
self.process_field(name, field_config)
if not fields:
default_config = DefaultSerializedField()
for field in regular_field_of(item):
if not name_of(field) in item.exclude:
self.process_field(name_of(field), default_config)
The idea is not to abandon all current assumption about how
serialization proceeds, but to do so only to a degree such that we get
the flexibility needed.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" 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-developers?hl=en.
