What if I needed two controllers to share the same model? Would I then
place two definitions in request.models?
Not 0.py that is not a valid python filename. Python modules/variables
cannot start with numbers.
how about just a simple "exec.py" that gets loaded before everything?
--
Thadeus
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:22 AM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> one we agree with the syntax, this is easy. The main issue is making
> sure it works with bytecode compiled models.
>
> On Jun 10, 11:20 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>> Here is my proposal:
>>
>> define the following:
>>
>> request.models=(
>> ('*','db.py'),
>> ('*','model1.py'),
>> ('*','model2.py'),
>> ('default','model3.py'),
>> ('default/a,default/b','model4.py'),
>> )
>>
>> it specifies the order in which models should be executed. For each
>> row, the first item specifies whether the model should be executed for
>> all actions (*) for all actions in a controller (default) or only for
>> specific actions (default/a, default/b). The second item in the model
>> name.
>>
>> All models not listed would be executed in alphabetical order after
>> those listed explicitly (backward compatibility).
>>
>> request.models would default to [].
>>
>> there would be a special model (execmodels.py? 0.py?) that would
>> always be executed before every other model and it may override the
>> value of request.models.
>>
>> all required code should go in a single place run_models_in() in gluon/
>> compileapp.py
>>
>> Massimo
>>
>> On Jun 10, 10:56 am, Thadeus Burgess <thade...@thadeusb.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I like the idea of an execmodels.py file, it could create a list of
>> > model names to execute.. Not yaml or cfg because that means web2py
>> > would require yet another library
>>
>> > Massimo, tell me where this code *should* go and I will work on it
>> > since this is a very important feature to me. Lets draft up a
>> > specification and design first...
>>
>> > I will make a public google doc located here
>>
>> >https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ActNNXQhkjU-ZGMyajJnbTdfOGZ3Z2IzOH...
>>
>> > everyone can edit this doc
>>
>> > What about requiring models from other apps? (i know apps arn't
>> > supposed to depend on each other, but it might be a good option to add
>> > so you *can* do it).
>>
>> > --
>> > Thadeus
>>
>> > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>> > > They both make a lot of sense. The former would be much easier to
>> > > implement and would result in faster code.
>> > > What do other people think?
>>
>> > > On Jun 9, 11:32 pm, Salvor Hardin <salvor.pub...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> I'm new to python and web2py, so this might sound crazy but...here
>> > >> goes.
>>
>> > >> Noob idea #1
>> > >> Why not provide an optional "exec_models.cfg" file? If it doesn't
>> > >> exist, execute *.py files in alphabetical order found in the models
>> > >> folder.
>>
>> > >> This will maintain backward compatibility and give web2py more
>> > >> flexibility.
>>
>> > >> If exec_models.cfg exists, then exec the files in the order specified
>> > >> inside exec_models.cfg. If you want to get fancy, allow wildcards,
>> > >> etc. Even better, you can also use exec_models.py or exec_models.yaml
>> > >> instead of simple config.
>>
>> > >> Noob idea #2
>> > >> Provide web2py's version of python's "import" function. Call it
>> > >> "require(somefile.py)" and provide some web2py convention for
>> > >> somefile.py to follow. That way, you can have require() detect and
>> > >> decide what to do if somefile.py was already executed. Ruby has
>> > >> "require" and rubygems added their own "require_gem()" function which
>> > >> might provide useful ideas so you don't have to reinvent the wheel.
>>
>> > >> It is late, and these are ideas that surfaced in the mind of a python
>> > >> and web2py noob. If you must laugh, do so with compassion. In the
>> > >> meantime, I'll try to read at least one python book by next Monday.
>> > >> Think Python is free online and looks like a quick one.
>>
>> > >> On Jun 9, 9:32 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > >> > My approach is to use
>>
>> > >> > db_blablabla1.py
>> > >> > db_blablabla2.py
>> > >> > db_blablabla3.py
>> > >> > ....
>>
>> > >> > where db_blablabla.py defiles all tables that link each other for a
>> > >> > specific purpose. The different files are independent and therefore
>> > >> > the order of execution is not important.
>>
>> > >> > On Jun 9, 9:20 pm, Thadeus Burgess <thade...@thadeusb.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> > > There are some things you can do to alleviate the situation.
>>
>> > >> > > First, you can name you models so that they execute in the correct
>> > >> > > order.
>>
>> > >> > > A_db.py
>> > >> > > B_user.py
>> > >> > > C_post.py
>> > >> > > E_tag.py
>>
>> > >> > > That said, I usually try to keep all related models in the same
>> > >> > > file.
>> > >> > > In your case you might have
>>
>> > >> > > B_user.py
>> > >> > > C_weblog.py
>>
>> > >> > > Since post and tag both belong to the same logical set of tables,
>> > >> > > stick them together in one file. For objects, I also might subset it
>> > >> > > simpler such as
>>
>> > >> > > C_weblog.py
>> > >> > > C_weblog_objects.py # contains virtualfield definitions.
>>
>> > >> > > --
>> > >> > > Thadeus
>>
>> > >> > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:42 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu>
>> > >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > > No. This the main issue with web2py design. This is the price we
>> > >> > > > pay
>> > >> > > > for not having imports of models.
>>
>> > >> > > > On Jun 9, 4:21 pm, Binh <btbinht...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> > > >> Hi,
>>
>> > >> > > >> I am trying to create an orm setup like in ruby on rails with
>> > >> > > >> the DAL.
>> > >> > > >> I have a user, post, and tag model.
>> > >> > > >> A user has many posts.
>> > >> > > >> A tag belongs to a user.
>> > >> > > >> A post has and belongs to many tags.
>> > >> > > >> A tag has and belongs to many posts.
>>
>> > >> > > >> I have 4 separate files in my models folder: db.py, user.py,
>> > >> > > >> post.py,
>> > >> > > >> and tag.py
>> > >> > > >> db.py contains the db connection and mail configurations.
>> > >> > > >> The respective model files define the table structure and have a
>> > >> > > >> class
>> > >> > > >> named after the model to implement virtual fields.
>>
>> > >> > > >> I noticed that defining the tables with relationships in the
>> > >> > > >> separate
>> > >> > > >> files does not work properly.
>> > >> > > >> The model files would load which appears to be in alphabetical
>> > >> > > >> order.
>> > >> > > >> So, my db.py would load first and then post.py which fails.
>> > >> > > >> post.py fails to recognize the table definition in user.py, so it
>> > >> > > >> cannot define the belongs to relationship.
>>
>> > >> > > >> Is their anyway to setup a model file to import all the other
>> > >> > > >> models
>> > >> > > >> without the hassle of file load order and possibly import order
>> > >> > > >> which
>> > >> > > >> rails does implicitly?
>
