-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 886
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add "LIFT" sentinel for context and name arguments to add_view #3739
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Barbiek001st
can you please target the main branch with this initial PR? once that's merged we'll backport it to the 2.0-branch potentially. |
8027dfd
to
184d815
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not against this PR at all but I literally cannot read this code and understand it. I've never used venusian's lift / subclassing. So if it's waiting for me I think I'm going to need some handholding.
It appears to be using traversal with the class being used as both the view and the resource. With the view name being the method name due to that being the default behavior of how traversal works.
Can you paste a version of this code that works without this feature so I can understand it better? |
tldr seems to be:
Yes? No? |
If the TLDR is correct it's kind of weird to hide that behavior behind the term "LIFT" as it doesn't seem to really match what lift means in venusian. But I'm learning as I think about this. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing tests / coverage for this feature.
Yes, but we need the magic because the class isn't defined until the venusian scan is happening. The |
None of this is specific to the lift feature though is it?
@view_config(name=VALUE_FROM_FUNCTION_NAME)
def foo(request):
... and similarly class FooResource:
def __init__(self, request):
self.request = request
@view_config(context=SELF)
def foo(self):
... I don't think For What if we supported |
You're right. Not specific to LIFT. That is just how I'll use it and I needed a name. Names are sometimes hard! :) I like typing.Self. I'll work on a commit for that soon. BTW, I'm trying to get some tests written, but having a hard time. I've been trying to call add_view and just verify that the sentinel was replaced in the view registry, but I don't understand those internals well and haven't yet had success. Re: name. it could be used on a normal view, but that would be pointless. The value is in using with view_defaults, hence the error if not used on a class method. Now, imagine a class with many dozens of view methods. It is tedious and redundant to have to add the name argument to all the view_config decorators. This is precisely what view_defaults is for IMO. For myself, this functionality is worth the cost, which is a test and some documentation as the implementation is hardly 2 lines and is optional for all those who don't care, but it's not a hill I'll die on. The context sentinel is essential. I'll get to these changes asap, but it's an after hours project for me :) |
This change adds a "LIFT" sentinel that signals context and name arguments to add_view should be computed at scan time. This is useful when using venusian.lift to propagate view_config decorators through a view class inheritance hierarchy. LIFT for name in conjunction with view_defaults helps reduces boilerplate and for context it is essential to avoid pyramid.exceptions.ConfigurationConflictError.
I've included an integration test below, but I need help making this into unit tests. Tox is failing for coverage but there is no other breakage.