On 21 avr, 14:10, KLEIN Stéphane <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 21 avr, 11:42, Gaetan de Menten <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 20:01, KLEIN Stéphane <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > On 20 avr, 16:03, Gaetan de Menten <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 15:42, KLEIN Stéphane <[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > what do you think about "abstract" entity option like Abstract base
> > >> > classes feature in Django ORM (http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/
> > >> > topics/db/models/#id6) ?
> > >> You can already have a similar behavior by using a custom base
> > >> class:http://elixir.ematia.de/trac/browser/elixir/trunk/tests/test_customba...
>
> > >> The only shortcoming I know of for this approach is that you can't
> > >> have an abstract entity which inherits from a non-abstract one, but I
> > >> don't think this is very useful in practice.
> > > This is a working dirty example (http://pypaste.com/
> > > 4ApPiBlwAHHcNJ6JNQPOSw) :
>
> > I know how it works... But in case you were trying to prove the
> > limitation I described doesn't exist, in your example BaseA is
> > effectively abstract since it won't create tables.
>
> > > This is what I would like (http://pypaste.com/
> > > 2f7cBSGCSiIsku6ZDDM0vU) :
>
> > > from elixir import *
>
> > > metadata.bind = 'sqlite:///test.db'
>
> > > class AbstractA(Entity):
> > > using_options(abstract = True)
>
> > > field_a = Field(Unicode())
>
> > > class AbstractB(Entity):
> > > using_options(abstract = True)
>
> > > field_b = Field(Unicode())
>
> > > class C(AbstractB):
> > > field_c = Field(Unicode())
>
> > > class D(AbstractB):
> > > field_d = Field(Unicode())
>
> > > class E(AbstractA):
> > > field_e = Field(Unicode())
>
> > > if __name__ == '__main__':
> > > setup_all()
> > > create_all()
>
> > > In my personal stuff, I've many generic model with multi inheritance.
> > > This is why I need this feature.
>
> > > What do you think about this 'using_options(abstract = True)'
> > > feature ?
>
> Sorry, I've make one mistake in my example, I've fixed it :
>
> http://pypaste.com/2f7cBSGCSiIsku6ZDDM0vU
>
> In this example, I've five class.
>
> In dirty example (http://pypaste.com/4ApPiBlwAHHcNJ6JNQPOSw) I've six
> class to do the same thing.
>
> > You just want a different syntax to do the same as the __metaclass__
> > approach? What's wrong with that syntax?
>
> Now, do you see the difference ?
My patch is here : http://elixir.ematia.de/trac/ticket/89
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SQLElixir" 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/sqlelixir?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
