Django: How can I implement Hierarchy of classes in Django? - python

I am completely aware of MVC Framework and how Django implements models and views. What I want to know how can I implement custom Hierarchy classes and then use them in Django. For instance:
There is an abstract Class Employee and then subclasses; Permanent Employee,Interns etc. An employee can be hired and fired by the company.

Model inheritance in Django works almost identically to the way normal class inheritance works in Python, but the basics at the beginning of the page should still be followed. That means the base class should subclass django.db.models.Model.
The only decision you have to make is whether you want the parent models to be models in their own right (with their own database tables), or if the parents are just holders of common information that will only be visible through the child models.
There are three styles of inheritance that are possible in Django.
1)
Often, you will just want to use the parent class to hold information that you don’t want to have to type out for each child model. This class isn’t going to ever be used in isolation, so Abstract base classes are what you’re after.
from django.db import models
class CommonInfo(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
age = models.PositiveIntegerField()
class Meta:
abstract = True
class Student(CommonInfo):
home_group = models.CharField(max_length=5)
Edit:
Abstract base classes
Abstract base classes are useful when you want to put some common information into a number of other models. You write your base class and put abstract=True in the Meta class. This model will then not be used to create any database table. Instead, when it is used as a base class for other models, its fields will be added to those of the child class. It is an error to have fields in the abstract base class with the same name as those in the child (and Django will raise an exception).
from django.db import models
class CommonInfo(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
age = models.PositiveIntegerField()
class Meta:
abstract = True
class Student(CommonInfo):
home_group = models.CharField(max_length=5)
The Student model will have three fields: name, age and home_group. The CommonInfo model cannot be used as a normal Django model, since it is an abstract base class. It does not generate a database table or have a manager, and cannot be instantiated or saved directly.
For many uses, this type of model inheritance will be exactly what you want. It provides a way to factor out common information at the Python level, while still only creating one database table per child model at the database level.
2)
If you’re subclassing an existing model (perhaps something from another application entirely) and want each model to have its own database table, Multi-table inheritance is the way to go.
from django.db import models
class CommonInfo(models.Model):
# ...
class Meta:
abstract = True
ordering = ['name']
class Student(CommonInfo):
# ...
class Meta(CommonInfo.Meta):
db_table = 'student_info'
3)
Finally, if you only want to modify the Python-level behavior of a model, without changing the models fields in any way, you can use Proxy models.
from django.db import models
class Base(models.Model):
m2m = models.ManyToManyField(
OtherModel,
related_name="%(app_label)s_%(class)s_related",
related_query_name="%(app_label)s_%(class)ss",
)
class Meta:
abstract = True
class ChildA(Base):
pass
class ChildB(Base):
pass
Along with another app rare/models.py:
from common.models import Base
class ChildB(Base):
pass
For more information you may want to continue reading the documentation here.
There is a well maintenanced project, called django-mptt, that implementing Modified Preorder Tree Traversal with your Django Models and working with trees of Model instances.

If i understand you right, you have two class hierarchies. You can use Bridge pattern to deal with it. Your custom hierarchy can be thought of as the abstraction and Django part as the implementation. The bridge pattern can also be thought of as two layers of abstraction.
The bridge pattern is a design pattern used in software engineering
that is meant to "decouple an abstraction from its implementation so
that the two can vary independently", introduced by the Gang of Four
(GoF). The bridge uses encapsulation, aggregation, and can use
inheritance to separate responsibilities into different classes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_pattern

Related

ForeignKey between Django Models abstract base classes

I have a Django app where I want to use a set of abstract base classes to define certain models. I want to connect some of these abstract models through foreign keys.
I know that Django does not allow models.ForeignKey to abstract models. I've done some searching on StackOverflow and the general consensus solution seems to be - using GenericForeignKey. However, from my understanding, this results in an extra db-level SELECT call. I want to avoid this because quite a few of my abstract models have this kind of relationship. An example is given below:
class Person (models.Model):
name = models.CharField (max_length=256)
class Meta:
abstract = True
class Phone (models.Model):
phone_no = models.BigIntegerField ()
owner = models.ForeignKey (Person) # This is, of course, wrong. I'd like something like this.
class Meta:
abstract = True
Besides the posts about GenericForeignKey, I also came across a post about dynamic model generation. The link is given below. The question-poster themselves have provided the answer.
Defining an Abstract model with a ForeignKey to another Abstract model
I would like to ask:
if this still holds for the current versions of Django,
if there are any caveats I should be aware of, and
if there is perhaps a more contemporary solution?
Thank you.
I have solved the issue. As pointed by Willem and Mohit, I was thinking about the problem wrongly (I come from the Cpp world and am very new to the Python/Django programming mindset).
I ended up having the abstract classes defined without any relationships and then having concrete classes derived from these abstract ones actually define the relationships. This is also in keeping with the DRY principle.

Django model inheritance: override restrictions in child classes

I will try to abstract my problem:
I need to create two model classes for IPv4 and IPv6.
I want to do it via inheritance; namely, to create a model class, and then to inherit from this class, but with the additional (different) limit for each of the child classes:
class IP(models.Model):
ip = models.GenericIPAddressField()
class Meta:
abstract = True
class IPv4(IP):
ip = models.GenericIPAddressField(protocol='ipv4')
class IPv6(IP):
ip = models.GenericIPAddressField(protocol='ipv6')
I'm not sure whether or not this is the correct way to do that, and I would like to know which problems might be caused due to such a model.
The Abstract Model is usually used to define a model with common fields.
If you define the same field in two models, that field is unnecessary for the base model.
However, in your code, that field('IP.ip') will be virtually absent, so it will not be an operational problem.

When creating a custom User model in Django what is the difference between inheriting from models.Model and AuthUser?

I've seen two ways of extending the User model in Django.
Method 1:
class User(AuthUser):
new fields...
Method 2:
class MyUser(models.Model):
user = models.OneToOneField(User)
new fields...
What is the difference between them?
The first one is multi table inheritance. (I presume you are actually speacking of django.contrib.auth.models.User here). Your new User model will have all the field that are defined in django's user model. This is managed by django implicitly creating a OneToOneField on your model.
The second, one you are creating the OneToOneField yourself. Now the django.contrib.auth.model.User model's fields do not automatically appear as parts of your own model. YOu can still access them as
myinstance.user.parent_field
Having said all this, for option 1 you should inherit from an abstract base class rather than directly from the User model.
class MyUser(AbstractBaseUser):
...

Django Many-To-Many Relationships between two models

I'm building a web app to help me manage my classes. So I have a Class model and a Student model and I want each Class to have multiple Students and I want each Student to be able to enroll in multiple Classes:
class Class(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=30)
enrolled_students = models.ManyToManyField('Student', blank=True)
...
class Student(models.Model):
enrolled_classes = models.ManyToManyField(Class, blank=True)
This works just fine but it's tedious. I create a class and then I create a student and add the enrolled class. And then I have to go BACK into the class and enroll the student. How do I automate this process so that Django automatically keeps track of which students are in which classes and which classes have which students enrolled?
I'm sure there's something simple that I'm missing or not understanding.
There is no need to do this at all. All relationship fields, including many-to-many, automatically add a backwards accessor. Just define the field on one side of the relation; for example, if you define it on Class, you can refer to the classes a student is enrolled in as my_student.class_set.all().

How to share and specialize base models in different Django applications?

We are developing a collection management project using Django, usable for different types of collections.
This problem quite naturally divides itself in two:
The common part, that will be shared by all collections.
The specializations, different for each collection type.
Example
To illustrate this a bit further, let's take a simplified example in pseudocode.
Common part
class ItemBase: # ideally abstract
name = CharField()
class Rental
item = ForeignKey("Item")
rented_to_person = CharField()
Specialization for a collection of cars
class ItemSpecialization
horse_power = Int()
 The problem
The question is how we could organize the code in order to allow reuse of the common part without duplicating its content ?
We would imagine it would be best to have the common part as a non-installed application, and have each specialized configuration as a separate installed application. But this would cause a problem with the Rental concrete class, because it resides in the common-part application.
Any advices on how we could proceed ?
It really depends on what you want, you may use an abstract model class for common stuff, and inherit from that in specialized model classes.
Otherwise, if you really want one table for all common data, typically to be able to relate to it, then you'll need your specialized model to have a relation to the common model. It can be a foreign key, or you can use model inheritance, in which case the foreign key in question will be managed for you by django, but it'll be harder to use.
It sounds like you're looking for a OneToOneField field relationship. Based on your example:
class ItemBase:
name = models.CharField(max_length=50)
class Rental:
item = models.OneToOneField(ItemBase)
rented_to_person = models.CharField(max_length=50)
class ItemSpecialization
item = models.OneToOneField(ItemBase)
horse_power = models.IntegerField()
With this model hierarchy, you could fetch Rental or ItemSpecialzation objects and also gain access to ItemBase fields. It's basically OO inheritance for Django models. More details in the docs: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/topics/db/examples/one_to_one/

Categories