[dabo-users] Backend default field values
Hi, I see that Dabo has ability to retrieve fields set to their default values on backend. Unfortunately this feature is mutually exclusive with another feature. If I set DefaultVales property there is no retrieving any more, but I would like to use both features simultaneously. I found two options till now: - set DefaultValues=None and move settings to OnNew() method - requery bizobj every new record save. Don't you think that they should be independent each other? Maybe there should be a NullDefaults tuple property instead? -- Regards Jacek Kałucki ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4b56e9e8.5090...@rz.onet.pl
Re: [dabo-users] Backend default field values
On Jan 20, 2010, at 6:32 AM, Jacek Kałucki wrote: I see that Dabo has ability to retrieve fields set to their default values on backend. I don't know what you are referring to. We retrieve the contents of records from the database, no matter how they are set. Unfortunately this feature is mutually exclusive with another feature. If I set DefaultVales property there is no retrieving any more, but I would like to use both features simultaneously. I found two options till now: - set DefaultValues=None and move settings to OnNew() method - requery bizobj every new record save. Don't you think that they should be independent each other? Maybe there should be a NullDefaults tuple property instead? I am not understanding what you are trying to accomplish. You'll need to explain better, perhaps with an example. -- Ed Leafe ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/2b0eb737-c9f4-43ca-97c3-046886b0f...@leafe.com
Re: [dabo-users] Backend default field values
Użytkownik Ed Leafe napisał: On Jan 20, 2010, at 6:32 AM, Jacek Kałucki wrote: I see that Dabo has ability to retrieve fields set to their default values on backend. I don't know what you are referring to. We retrieve the contents of records from the database, no matter how they are set. Unfortunately this feature is mutually exclusive with another feature. If I set DefaultVales property there is no retrieving any more, but I would like to use both features simultaneously. I found two options till now: - set DefaultValues=None and move settings to OnNew() method - requery bizobj every new record save. Don't you think that they should be independent each other? Maybe there should be a NullDefaults tuple property instead? I am not understanding what you are trying to accomplish. You'll need to explain better, perhaps with an example. Look at dCursorMixin.__saverow() method. There is code: code if newrec and self._nullDefaults: # We need to retrieve any new default values aux = self.AuxCursor if not isinstance(self.KeyField, tuple): keyFIelds = [self.KeyField] else: keyFIelds = self.KeyField wheres = [] for kf in keyFIelds: fld = self.BackendObject.encloseNames(kf, self.AutoQuoteNames) val = self.getFieldVal(kf) if isinstance(val, basestring): val = ' + val.encode(self.Encoding) + ' elif isinstance(val, (datetime.date, datetime.datetime)): val = self.formatDateTime(val) else: val = str(val) wheres.append(%s = %s % (fld, val)) where = and .join(wheres) aux.execute(select * from %s where %s % (self.Table, where)) try: data = aux.getDataSet()[0] for fld, val in data.items(): try: self.setFieldVal(fld, val) except dException.FieldNotFoundException: # Field is not in the dataset pass except IndexError: # For some reason we could not retrieve the matching PK record pass /code Above code retrieve field values of new saved record from backend, in case they were set by backend. But it only works when self._nullDefaults equals True (default False). This attribute is set in setDefaults() method but method is never executed for non empty defaults. As you see in setDefaults() method code, _nullDefaults equals True only if DefaultValues bizobj property equals None, it's mean that all fields are initialized to None value. In other words, I can't mix default field values from framework and backend. I can't choose that field_1 is set to default on backend and field_2 in framework. -- Regards Jacek Kałucki ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4b570bec.1090...@rz.onet.pl
Re: [dabo-users] Backend default field values
On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Jacek Kałucki wrote: Above code retrieve field values of new saved record from backend, in case they were set by backend. But it only works when self._nullDefaults equals True (default False). This attribute is set in setDefaults() method but method is never executed for non empty defaults. As you see in setDefaults() method code, _nullDefaults equals True only if DefaultValues bizobj property equals None, it's mean that all fields are initialized to None value. So am I correct that you want to have default values set in both the bizobj *and* in the database? If so, am I the only one who thinks that this is a very brittle design? The reason the check is there is to avoid unnecessary traffic to the database. IOW, if your bizobj has already handled the default values, there is no need to call the database for each new record a second time. But it sounds to me like you want the bizobj to only handle some of the logic, and let the database handle the rest? -- Ed Leafe ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/db268937-e08d-4397-8a8f-cb2442093...@leafe.com
Re: [dabo-users] Backend default field values
Użytkownik Ed Leafe napisał: So am I correct that you want to have default values set in both the bizobj *and* in the database? If so, am I the only one who thinks that this is a very brittle design? The reason the check is there is to avoid unnecessary traffic to the database. IOW, if your bizobj has already handled the default values, there is no need to call the database for each new record a second time. But it sounds to me like you want the bizobj to only handle some of the logic, and let the database handle the rest? Almost all fields are set to default in framework: dates, amounts, etc. But there are (usually no more than one per table) fields that are very important. They are document reference symbols, which are very specific fields. Since documents are restricted, these fields: - must be unique - numeration must be continuous without missing values - can't be changed or removed. Now it's done in single stage operation/transaction on backend. I can split this process and save record and then get reference from backend as stored procedure and update table but risk of failure increases. And there must be nested transaction involved. Now I'm still researching how to resolve this safely. -- Regards Jacek Kałucki ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4b5723b5.6090...@rz.onet.pl
[dabo-users] cdxml vs. coding
I have heard some folks saying that they code their own forms. After working with the class designer I feel that it is even better than VFP. I can put together a great form in a short period of time and the property sheet, object view, code editor are better than VFP by a long shot (in my opinion of course - I've only been working with FoxPro since 91). The sizers make for a very professional form, too. I would like to know why some of you code your own forms by hand. Just a question. TIA -- Jeff Jeff Johnson j...@dcsoftware.com Phoenix Python User Group - sunpigg...@googlegroups.com ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4b57b37a.40...@dcsoftware.com
Re: [dabo-users] cdxml vs. coding
On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: I have heard some folks saying that they code their own forms. After working with the class designer I feel that it is even better than VFP. I can put together a great form in a short period of time and the property sheet, object view, code editor are better than VFP by a long shot (in my opinion of course - I've only been working with FoxPro since 91). The sizers make for a very professional form, too. I would like to know why some of you code your own forms by hand. Dabo had been around for several years before I got the Class Designer to the point where it was reliable enough for real production use. In the meantime, coding your UIs by hand was the only option, and thanks to Python's ability to quickly run your code, is almost as fast to do in the hands of a good coder. I still remember in the Fox 2.x days that there were devs who shunned the whole .scx stuff, and coded all their forms in PRGs. It was simply that that's the way they learned to do it, and they got very good at it, so they saw no reason to change. -- Ed Leafe ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/24fb6dc8-695b-49c0-b270-7af915767...@leafe.com
Re: [dabo-users] cdxml vs. coding
Ed Leafe wrote: On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:52 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: I have heard some folks saying that they code their own forms. After working with the class designer I feel that it is even better than VFP. I can put together a great form in a short period of time and the property sheet, object view, code editor are better than VFP by a long shot (in my opinion of course - I've only been working with FoxPro since 91). The sizers make for a very professional form, too. I would like to know why some of you code your own forms by hand. Dabo had been around for several years before I got the Class Designer to the point where it was reliable enough for real production use. In the meantime, coding your UIs by hand was the only option, and thanks to Python's ability to quickly run your code, is almost as fast to do in the hands of a good coder. I still remember in the Fox 2.x days that there were devs who shunned the whole .scx stuff, and coded all their forms in PRGs. It was simply that that's the way they learned to do it, and they got very good at it, so they saw no reason to change. -- Ed Leafe Ed: I was one of those guys. Maybe that's why I asked the question. I am totally impressed with the job you guys have done. The class designer is a powerful, reliable and intuitive tool to use. We won't even mention Python here!!! I am about to launch a major application using Dabo and I feel confident I can use Dabo instead of VFP with equivalent results. I can use VFP9 for familiarity, but I want to use Dabo. Thank you for your dedication to this great project! Jeff Jeff Johnson j...@dcsoftware.com Phoenix Python User Group - sunpigg...@googlegroups.com ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4b57ca0d.1070...@dcsoftware.com
Re: [dabo-users] cdxml vs. coding
On Wednesday 20 January 2010 05:52:58 pm Jeff Johnson wrote: I have heard some folks saying that they code their own forms. After working with the class designer I feel that it is even better than VFP. I can put together a great form in a short period of time and the property sheet, object view, code editor are better than VFP by a long shot (in my opinion of course - I've only been working with FoxPro since 91). The sizers make for a very professional form, too. I would like to know why some of you code your own forms by hand. Just a question. TIA Today there is not much of a reason to hand code a form. That said, I still hand code my forms. I find that it offers flexibility that the ClassDesigner does not. Johnf ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/201001201926.16475.jo...@jfcomputer.com
Re: [dabo-users] cdxml vs. coding
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 22:29, Jeff Johnson j...@dcsoftware.com wrote: Ed: I was one of those guys. Maybe that's why I asked the question. I am totally impressed with the job you guys have done. The class designer is a powerful, reliable and intuitive tool to use. We won't even mention Python here!!! I am about to launch a major application using Dabo and I feel confident I can use Dabo instead of VFP with equivalent results. I can use VFP9 for familiarity, but I want to use Dabo. Jeff, Its funny that you mention reliability because it's the reason why I do not use the ClassDesigner. I have run into issues and while it has gotten so much better since I started using Dabo, I find I can hand code a form just as fast on a reliable text editor. I have lost changes and had trouble making changes to the designer code more times than I care to count. Maybe this is because I use a large set of custom controls, many with dynamic display properties. Either way, I use all of the other xml standards dabo has (connection, menu, and report), just not the class designer. Ed has done a tremendous amount of work to it and I like what I see so far, it's just not there enough for my liking. Regards, Nate --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- ___ Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com 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/4bef56241001201958l1250a3f6j21e66d413edab...@mail.gmail.com
