I am trying to figure out what class Meta: really do in Django.
I come across with the code below in DRF, but not sure why under class Meta: there is model = User and fields = [...]. Does it help to create a database?
from django.contrib.auth.models import User, Group
from rest_framework import serializers
class UserSerializer(
serializers.HyperlinkedModelSerializer):
class Meta:
model = User
fields = ['url', 'username', 'email', 'groups']
And also what is the different with the class Meta: used in Django as below.
from django.db import models
class Ox(models.Model):
horn_length = models.IntegerField()
class Meta:
ordering = ["horn_length"]
verbose_name_plural = "oxen"
I have tried to get further understanding from both Django and DRF documentation however I did not see the explanation for model = ... and fields = [...] used in DRF class Meta.
Hope someone could help to explain the functioning principle behind. Thanks!
The Meta class is merely a convenient place to group metadata (meaning data about the data) that DRF needs to adjust its configuration, but keep this separate from the attributes of the class itself. This separation allows the Django Rest Framework (and the wider Django Framework ecosystem) to avoid clashes between configuration and the actual class definitions.
The use of an inner Meta class is a common pattern throughout Django, because this allows you to both keep this configuration separate from the fields of the class and keep it connected to the class in a way that's easy to read and easy for the framework to find. A DRF selialiser class should normally have one or more fields to help turn data into a serialized form, but the HyperlinkedModelSerializer base class can generate these fields for you if you tell it what model you wanted to serialise. The fields on the Meta class tell it you want to serialize specific fields from your User model.
By putting this configuration on the inner Meta class, they are kept in a separate namespace from the main class, but at the same time remain connected to the class they are meant to configure. Imagine a model that has a field named model and fields for example. If the HyperlinkedModelSerializer required that configuration is found in the subclass itself, you could never produce a serializer that could process something with model and fields fields!
If you wanted to know what the different options are you can use on the inner Meta class, you need to read the ModelSerialiser and HyperlinkedModelSerializer documentation in the API guide section.
For Django Models, you can refer to the Model Meta chapter of the Django documentation. As I stated above, it's the same concept but here the Meta class configures the database fields that the model supports and how the model relates to other database models you may have defined.
Last but not least, there is another answer here that confuses the term Meta with Python Metaclasses, which is a very different concept. While DRF and Django model classes lean heavily on metaclasses for their internal implementation, the class Meta: definition you use to configure the framework functionality, they are not metaclasses. They are plain classes that are only used because they make for a convenient namespace.
class Meta is used in DRF serializers to configure your serializer.
model defines the model to which your serializer is linked.
fields is a list of properties that you would like to serve in your API.
Use fields = ['__all__'] to serve all properties
Use exclude = ['your_excluded_prop_1', 'your_excluded_prop_2'] to exclude properties
The concept of Meta class comes from metaprogramming. The term metaprogramming refers to manipulating itself. Python supports a form of metaprogramming for classes called metaclasses. Meta class is mainly the inner class of your main class. Meta class is basically used to change the behavior of your main class attributes. It’s completely optional to add a Meta class to your Class. But in your Django project, you have already seen this metaclass concept available in different places like models.py, serializers.py, admin.py, etc.
Actually, this Meta class changes the common behavior of its main class like the model metaclass changing behavior using verbose_name, db_table, proxy, permissions, ordering etc, and a lot of other options. Meta class in serializer also does the exact same things it tells it the model to use and what fields to serialize by using fields, exclude, and model.
Good Luck :)
Related
I use Enterprise Architect for code generation and I would like to automatically retrieve all tags (in my case Java annotations) of the interfaces that a class realizes. Consider the following example:
From this model, I want to generate a class that looks like this:
#AnnotationOfMyInterface
public class MyClass {
...
}
So I want to add annotations as tags to MyInterface that should be applied to MyClass during code generation. In the UI, tags of implemented interfaces are shown so I was hoping there is a way to get these tags during code generation.
I tried to edit the code generation templates and found macros to get
All interfaces that a class implements: %list="ClassInterface" #separator=", "%
All tags with a given name (of the class that code is being generated for): %classTag:"annotations"%
But unfortunately, I cannot combine these macros, i.e., I cannot pass one interface to the classTag macro so that I can retrieve the tags of that particular interface (and not the one I'm generating code for). Is there a way to get classTags of a specific class / interface?
I also tried to create a separate code generation template and "call" it from the main class code generation template. But inside my template, the classTag macro still only gets the tags of the class.
Thanks to the comments above and especially because of an answer to my question in EA's forum, I was able to setup a little proof of concept achieving what I wanted. I'm answering my question to document my solution in case someone has a similar problem in the future.
After Eve's hint in EA's forum I looked into creating an AddIn for Enterprise Architect to use this AddIn from a code generation template. I started by writing a basic AddIn as explained by #Geert Bellekens in this tutorial. Afterwards I changed the AddIn to fit my needs. This is how I finally got the tagged values (annotations) of the interfaces a class realizes:
First step:
Inside a code generation template, I get all the interfaces a class realizes and pass them to my AddIn:
$interfaces=%list="ClassInterface" #separator=", "%
%EXEC_ADD_IN("MyAddin","getInterfaceTags", $interfaces)%
Second step:
As documented here the repository objects gets passed along with the EXEC_ADD_IN call. I use the repository object and query for all interfaces using the names contained in $interfaces. I can then get the tagged values of each interface element. Simple prototype that achieves this for a single interface:
public Object getInterfaceTags(EA.Repository repo, Object args)
{
String[] interfaceNames = args as String[];
String firstInterfaceName = interfaceNames[0];
EA.Element interfaceElement = repo.GetElementsByQuery("Simple", firstInterfaceName).GetAt(0);
String tag = interfaceElement.TaggedValues.GetAt(0);
return interfaceElement.Name + " has tag value" + tag.Value;
}
I know, there are a couple of shortcomings but this is just a simple proof of concept for an idea that will most likely never be production code.
I'm looking for a way of condensing some of my AS3 code to avoid almost duplicate commands.
The issue is that I have multiple variables with almost the same name e.g. frenchLanguage, englishLanguage, germanLanguage, spanishLanguage
My Controller class contains public static variables (these are accessed across multiple classes) and I need a way to be able to call a few of these variables dynamically. If the variables are in the class you are calling them from you can do this to access them dynamically:
this["spanish"+"Language"]
In AS3 it's not possible to write something like:
Controller.this["spanish"+"Language"]
Is there any way to achieve this? Although everything is working I want to be able to keep my code as minimal as possible.
It is possible to access public static properties of a class this way (assuming the class name is Controller as in your example:
Controller['propertyName']
I'm not sure how this helps to have "minimal code", but this would be a different topic/question, which might need some more details on what you want to achive.
Having said that, I like the approach DodgerThud suggests in the comments of grouping similar values in a (dynamic) Object or Dictonary and give it a proper name.
Keep in mind, that if the string you pass in as the key to the class or dynamic object is created from (textual) user input you should have some checks for the validity of that data, otherwise your programm might crash or expose other fields to the user.
It would make sense to utilize a Dictionary object for a set of variables inherited: it provides a solid logic and it happens to work...
I do not think this is what you are trying to accomplish. I may be wrong.
Classes in AS3 are always wrapped within a package - this is true whether you have compiled from Flash, Flex, Air, or any other...
Don't let Adobe confuse you. This was only done in AS3 to use Java-Based conventions. Regardless, a loosely typed language is often misunderstood, unfortunately. So:
this["SuperObject"]["SubObject"]["ObjectsMethod"][ObjectsMethodsVariable"](args..);
... is technically reliable because the compiler avoids dot notation but at runtime it will collect a lot of unnecessary data to maintain those types of calls.
If efficiency becomes an issue..
Use:
package packages {
import flash.*.*:
class This implements ISpecialInterface {
// Data Objects and Function Model
// for This Class
}
package packages {
import...
class ISpecialInterface extends IEventDispatcher
The #Model annotation in Sling Models allows for multiple adaptables, for example
#Model(adaptables = { SlingHttpServletRequest.class, Resource.class })
However, I am not sure how to instantiate a Model with multiple adaptables from a JSP. The options shown in the Sling documentation always specify a single adaptable only: https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/models.html#adaptto
When your model is adaptable from both classes it means you can use any of them, not that you have to adapt both.
So, you adapt it as any other Sling Model. Just it should work with both.
In you case you could do
<sling:adaptTo adaptable="${resource}" adaptTo="org.apache.sling.models.it.models.MyModel" var="model"/>
or
<sling:adaptTo adaptable="${slingRequest}" adaptTo="org.apache.sling.models.it.models.MyModel" var="model"/>
Still, remember that if you are using injection, not all injectors are available from both adaptables. The request supports more than the resource (anything that comes from the script bindings, currentPage,etc)
The title may seems confusing, but it's not easy to describe the question in few words. Let me explain the situation:
We have a web application project, and a calculation engine project. The web application collect user input and use the engine to generate some result, and represent to user. Both user input, engine output and other data will be persisted to DB using JPA.
The engine input and output consist of objects in tree structure, example like:
Class InputA {
String attrA1;
List<InputB> inputBs;
}
Class InputB {
String attrB1;
List<InputC> inputCs;
}
Class InputC {
String attrC1;
}
The engine output is in similar style.
The web application project handle the data persistence using JPA. We need to persist the engine input and output, as well as some other data that related to the input and output. Such data can be seem as extra fields to certain class. For example:
We want to persist extra field, so it looks like:
Class InputBx extends InputB{
String attrBx1;
}
Class InputCx extends InputC{
String attrCx1;
}
In Java OO world, this works, we can store a list of InputBx in InputA, and store a list of InputCx in InputBx because of the inheritance.
But we meet trouble when using JPA to persist the extended objects.
First of all, it requires the engine project to make their class become JPA entities. The engine was working fine by itself, it accept correct input and generate correct output. It doesn't smell good to force their model to become JPA entities when another project try to persist the model.
Second, the JPA doesn't accept the inherited objects when using InputA as the entry. From JPA point of view, it only know that InputA contains a list of InputB, and not possible to persist/retrieve a list of InputBx in object of InputA.
When trying to solve this, we had come up 2 ideas, but neither one satisfied us:
idea 1:
Use composition instead inheritance, so we still persist the original InputA and it's tree structure include InputB and InputC:
Class InputBx{
String attrBx1;
InputB inputB;
}
Class InputCx{
String attrCx1;
InputC inputC;
}
So the original input object tree can be smoothly retrieved, and InputBx and InputCx objects needs to be retrieved using the InputB and InputC objects in the tree as references.
The good thing is that no matter what changes made to the structure of the original input class tree (such as change attribute name, add/remove attributes in the classes), the extended class InputBx and InputCx and their attributes automatically synchronized.
The drawback is that this structure increases the calls to the database, and the model is not easy to use in the application(both back end and front end). Whenever we want related information of InputB or InputC, we need to manually code to search the corresponding object of InputBx and InputCx.
idea 2:
Manually make mirror classes to form a similar structure of the original input classes. So we created:
Class InputAx {
String attrA1;
List<InputBx> inputBs;
}
Class InputBx {
String attrB1;
List<InputCx> inputCs;
String attrBx1;
}
Class InputCx {
String attrC1;
String attrCx1;
}
We could use this as model of the web application, and the JPA entities as well. Here's what we could get:
Now the engine project can be set free, it doesn't need to bind to how the other projects persist these input/output objects. The engine project is independant now.
The JPA persistence works just fluent, no extra calls to database is required
The back end and front end UI just use this model to get both original input objects and related information with no effort. When trying use engine to perform calculation, we can use a mapping mechanism to transfer between the original objects and extended objects.
The drawback is also obvious:
There is duplication in the class structure, which is not desired from the OO point of view.
When considering it as DTO to reduce the database calls, it can be claimed as anti-pattern when using DTO in local transfer.
The structure is not automatically synchronized with the original model. So if there are any changes made to the original model, we need to manually update this model as well. If some developers forget to do this, there will be some not-easy-to-find defects.
I'm looking for the following help:
Is there any existing good/best practices or patterns to solve similar situation we meet? Or any anti-patterns that we should try to avoid? References to web articles are welcome.
If possible, can you comment on the idea 1 and idea 2, from the aspect of OO design, Persistence practices, your experience, ect.
I will be grateful for your help.
I am very new to GWT.
I am using ext-gwt widgets.
I found many places in my office code containing like,
class A extends BaseModel{
private UserAccountDetailsDto userAccountDetailsDto = null;
//SETTER & GETTER IN BASEMODEL WAY
}
Also, the DTO reference is unused.
public class UserAccountDetailsDto implements Serializable{
private Long userId=null;
private String userName=null;
private String userAccount=null;
private String userPermissions=null;
//NORMAL SETTER & GETTER
}
Now, I am able to get the result from GWT Server side Code and things Work fine, but when I comment the DTO reference inside the class A, I am not getting any Result.
Please explain me the need of that.
Thanks
Well the problem is in implementation of GXT BaseModel and GWT-RPC serialization.
BaseModel is based around special GXT map, RpcMap. This map has defined special serialization rules, which let's avoid RPC type explosion, but as side effect, only some simple types stored in map will be serialized. E.g. you can put any type inside the map, but if you serialize/deserialize it, only values of type Integer, String ,Double,Byte, Float and Short (and arrays of this types) will be present. So the meaning behind putting reference to the DTO inside BaseModel, is to tell GWT-RPC that this type is also have to be serialized.
Detailed explanation
Basically GWT-RPC works like this:
When you define an interface for service, GWT-RPC analyzes all the classes used in parameters/ return type, to create serializers/deserializers. If you return something like Map<Object,Object> from your service, GWT-RPC will have to create a serializer for each class which implements Map and Serializable interfaces, but also it will generate serializers for each class which implements Serializable. In the end it is quite a bad situation, because the size of your compiled js file will be much biggger. This situation is called GWT-RPC type explosion.
So, in the BaseModel, all values are stored in RpcMap. And RpcMap has custom written serializer (RpcMap_CustomFieldSerializer you can see it's code if you interested how to create such things), so it doesn't cause the problem described above. But since it has custom serializer GWT dosn't know which custom class have been put inside RpcMap, and it doesn't generate serializers for them. So when you put some field into your BaseModel class, gwt knows that it might need to be able to serialize this class, so it will generate all the required stuff for this class.
Porting GXT2 Application code using BaseModel to GXT3 Model is uphill task. It would be more or less completely rewrite on model side with ModelProviders from GXT3 providing some flexibility. Any code that relies on Model's events, store, record etc are in for a rewrite.