On Fri 13 Jul 2007, Todd O'Bryan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 15:40 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > On 7/12/07, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Is there a good reason not to do something like the following in
> > > django.db.models.Model?
> > >
> > > def form(self):
> > >
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 01:31 -0400, Todd O'Bryan wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 14:43 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
>
> > I'm -1 one on this for pretty much the same reasons as Adrian. It's just
> > not that big a deal even for people who want to work the way you do.
>
> I should have
On 7/13/07, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question for the rest of the second message was a question of how
> much separation between forms and models there should be. For me the
> validation issue is key. We currently don't have any standard way to
> programmatically validate
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 18:21 -0400, Todd O'Bryan wrote:
> form_for_instance and form_for_model are great, but if you have to tweak
> the form in any way (say you want to use a non-default widget for one of
> the data fields) and want to use it more than once, you're reduced to
> defining a new
This doesn't seem a far step from the model fields being able to
return appropriate form fields, which they already do, so there's some
tie-in already :)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 15:40 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> On 7/12/07, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there a good reason not to do something like the following in
> > django.db.models.Model?
> >
> > def form(self):
> > return form_for_instance(self)
> >
> > @classmethod
> >
On 7/12/07, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a good reason not to do something like the following in
> django.db.models.Model?
>
> def form(self):
> return form_for_instance(self)
>
> @classmethod
> def form(cls):
> return form_for_model(cls)
Yes -- the good reasons
On 7/12/07, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I was writing this, I realized that you can't do this in Python
> because you can't overload function names, but surely somebody smarter
> than me can figure out a clever way that model_instance.form() and
> ModelClass.form() would both do
Is there a good reason not to do something like the following in
django.db.models.Model?
def form(self):
return form_for_instance(self)
@classmethod
def form(cls):
return form_for_model(cls)
As I was writing this, I realized that you can't do this in Python
because you can't overload
