We Keep Coding

Django ._meta and adding to ManyToMany fields

I haven't had much luck finding other questions that helped with this, but apologies if I missed something and this is a duplicate.
I'm trying to add to some ManyToMany fields, without having to explicitly type out the names of the fields in the code (because the function I'm working on will be used to add to multiple fields and I'd rather not have to repeat the same code for every field). I'm having a hard time using ._meta to reference the model and field objects correctly so that .add() doesn't throw an "AttributeError: 'ManyToManyField' object has no attribute 'add'".
This is simplified because the full body of code is too long to post it all here, but in models.py, I have models defined similar to this:
class Sandwich(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=MAX_CHAR_FIELD)
veggies = models.ManyToManyField(Veggie)
meats = models.ManyToManyField(Meat)
class Veggie(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=MAX_CHAR_FIELD)
class Meat(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=MAX_CHAR_FIELD)
Once instances of these are created and saved, I can successfully use .add() like this:
blt = Sandwich(name='blt')
blt.save()
lettuce = Veggies(name='lettuce')
lettuce.save()
tomato = Veggies(name='tomato')
tomato.save()
bacon = Meat(name='bacon')
bacon.save()
blt.veggies.add(lettuce)
blt.veggies.add(tomato)
blt.meats.add(bacon)
But if I try to use ._meta to get blt's fields and add to them that way, I can't. ie something like this,
field_name='meats'
field = blt._meta.get_field(field_name)
field.add(bacon)
will throw "AttributeError: 'ManyToManyField' object has no attribute 'add'".
So, how can I use ._meta or a similar approach to get and refer to these fields in a way that will let me use .add()? (bonus round, how and why is "blt.meats" different than "blt._meta.get_field('meats')" anyway?)

Why do you want to do
field = blt._meta.get_field(field_name)
field.add(bacon)
instead of
blt.meats.add(bacon)
in the first place?
If what you want is to access the attribute meats on the blt instance of the Sandwich class because you have the string 'meats' somewhere, then it's plain python you're after:
field_string = 'meats'
meats_attribute = getattr(blt, field_string, None)
if meats_attribute is not None:
meats_attribute.add(bacon)
But if your at the point where you're doing that sort of thing you might want to revise your data modelling.
Bonus round:
Call type() on blt.meats and on blt._meta.get_field(field_name) and see what each returns.
One is a ManyToManyField, the other a RelatedManager. First is an abstraction that allows you to tell Django you have a M2M relation between 2 models, so it can create a through table for you, the other is an interface for you to query those related objects (you can call .filter(), .exclude() on it... like querysets): https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/ref/models/relations/#django.db.models.fields.related.RelatedManager

MongoAlchemy: One of two different DocumentField's

Using MongoAlchemy, is it possible to have a DocumentField that can be one of two types? E.g:
class A(Document):
foo = StringField()
class B(Document):
bar = StringField()
class C(Document):
child = DocumentField(A or B)
I thought of a few options that might work:
Give A and B a common parent and then do child = DocumentField(CommonParent).
Write a custom Field that overrides DocumentField, but changes the validator to search through a list of types, instead of one.
Just use an AnythingField. Kinda defeats the point.
But wondered if it was already done?

There was a branch that I never merged (although I did use it for a while) where I implemented polymorphic types:
https://github.com/jeffjenkins/MongoAlchemy/tree/poly-queries
If you're willing to do a bit of bug fixing that's a pretty good option.
Otherwise the easiest thing to do is implement a custom field. I suspect it might be easier to create a regular field that took a list of DocumentFields as inputs and which could distinguish than to mess with DocumentField (which is sort of what the polymorphism branch does, but more complexly).

Best practice for accessing distantly related Django models

Let say we have a long chain of Django models, where each references the one above through a ForeignKey field:
class One(models.Model):
# fields
class Two(models.Model):
one = models.ForeignKey(One)
...
class Ten(models.Model):
nine = models.ForeignKey(Nine)
Good! Now image, if you will, having an instance of the Ten model and wanting to grab the related One instance. This can result in long lines of attribute chaining like this:
ten_instance.nine.eight.seven.six.five.four.three.two.one
I'm wondering what the standard approach would be to this niggling issue. Do we leave it as is, being inherently descriptive and readable. Or do we aim to shorten such a line to make things more simple:
ten_instance.one
 But What's The Best Practice Here? Or is there a more simple solution?

Use Properties
My current approach would be to add a property to the Ten model, abstracting away that attribute chaining:
class Ten(models.Model):
nine = models.ForeignKey(Nine)
#property
def one(self):
return self.nine.eight.seven.six.five.four.three.two.one
I can see a downside to this tactic however, and that's the added mysticism involved. Does the Ten instance actually have a relation to the One model or not? I wouldn't be able to tell without inspecting the model myself.

You probably want to use django-mptt for sophisticated hierarchal models although it can be a bit ott. If you want a simple hierarchy then add a ForeignKey to self:
class Number(models.Model):
parent = models.ForeignKey('self', blank=True, null=True,
related_name='child')
then the query would be something like this based on a unique field, say slug:
Number.objects.get(parent__slug='one')

Python model object validation

I'm writing an interface to be used by two applications. This interface should use some DoSomethingRequest and DoSomethingResponse classes to do the communication.
Is there any library that does some model validation, for example like Django's Model?
I basically want to be able to say something like:
Object A must have a "text" property of type str(), a "number" property of type int(), an "items" property of type list(). In a DRY way.
I'm looking for something like the following, or better:
class MyEmbeddedModelClass(EmbeddedModel):
text = TextField(required = True)
class MyModel(Model):
text = TextField(required = True)
number = IntField(default = 0)
items = ListField(EmbeddedModel)
a = MyModel()
a.text = "aaaa"
a.number = 1
a.items = [
MyEmbeddedModelClass("bbbb"),
MyEmbeddedModelClass("cccc"),
MyEmbeddedModelClass("dddd")
]
a.validate()
I know I can write my own, but I'd rather use a library if available, I'm a bit new to this.

If you want to enforce interfaces, or use design-by-contract, then you probably want the zope.interface library. Despite the name, which reflects its origins in Zope, it's not actually tied to that framework at all and is quite usable outside.

I think decorators could be used for this.
check this link
Combining Descriptors with Class Decorators for Validation
For a different approach check Duck typing

Because python is dynamic, the convention is to require an object to behave like an instance of a particular class rather than enforce a specific type.
Somewhere in your code, preferably at the point where you need to access those properties, but as early as possible assert that the object has those properties and further assert that those properties are what you expect them to be.
This raises an AssertionError exception if the object o, regardless of type, if it is missing the 'someattribute' attribute:
assert(hasattr(o, 'someattribute'))
Further, if o.someattribute is not a string:
assert(isinstance(o.someattribute, basestring))

How can I tell if an Expando subclass has a property defined?

I'm creating an app that I want to have an expandable set of properties (each a RatingProperty) I also want to validate that any dynamic properties are of the RatingProperty type.
In the Expando documentation it says:
Tip: If you want to validate a dynamic property value using a Property class, you can instantiate the Property class and call its validate() method on the value.
So if I want to validate a dynamic property I need to know what the class's non-dynamic properties are. How can I ask my class what it's defined properties are?
I've considered creating a class method that takes a string and returns true if that string is in a list of property names that I create and maintain, but it seems like a hack. I've searched the Google for tips, but haven't had any luck.
Thanks,
Pat

After a bit more research (damn you lazyweb!) I've found a solution that I think is acceptable:
A dynamic property can't be of a db subclassed property type. Thus, there are two distinct steps that must be taken. First you need to create an instance of your property class and validate your value:
test = db.RatingProperty()
if test.validate(valueToSave):
#do your thing
Next you need to check if the property you want to save is a declared property:
if valueToSaveKey not in myObject.properties():
#if not save it as desired
myObject.valueToSaveKey = valueToSave
The down side here is that the value you save isn't stored as the property type you want.

http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/modelclass.html#Model_properties
db.Model has methods to find out all the properties on an instance.
The class exposes a list of Property objects: db.Model.properties()
The instance exposes the dynamic names only: instance.dynamic_properties()
You want to loop through the list and build Property objects, and run p.validate().
for p_name in instance.dynamic_properties():
p = db.RatingProperty()
p.validate() # raises BadValueError, etc.

I may be misunderstanding your question, but if you have a list of properties you expect to find, why not just use a standard db.Model, instead of an Expando? You can add additional properties to a Model class, as long as you either provide a default or don't make them required.

It's actually quite easy!
ExpandoObject implements (IDictionary<String, Object>) so you just need to do this :
dynamic person = new ExpandoObject();
person.FirstName = "Barack";
person.LastName = "Obama"
(((IDictionary<String, Object>)person).Keys
=> { "FirstName", "LastName" }
(((IDictionary<String, Object>)person).ContainsKey("FirstName")
=> true
Note: You need to explicitly cast to (IDictionary<string, object> because ExpandoObject explicitly implements this interface - and the instance itself doesn't have ContainsKey() or Keys.
Don't expect this method to work with all dynamic objects - just ExpandoObject and anything else that implements this interface.