Defining field order in a dynamic Django form - django

I have written a factory function to create dynamic forms, as described towards the end of James Bennett's helpful post http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2008/nov/09/dynamic-forms/.
The form works perfectly well, but the items are shown in a somewhat random looking order, due (I assume) to the fact that fields is a dictionary (please see code sample below). How can I prescribe a defined display order for the form fields?
def make_form(assessment):
'''
Factory function to build and return dynamic AssessmentForms
'''
entries = assessment.entry_set.all()
fields = {}
for entry in entries:
fields[entry.name] = forms.ChoiceField(
required=False,
initial=entry.rating,
choices=CHOICES,
widget=forms.RadioSelect()
)
return type('AssessmentForm', (forms.BaseForm,), { 'base_fields': fields })

Yuji Tomita is right. You can use for example:
from django.utils.datastructures import SortedDict
fields = SortedDict()
for entry in entries:
fields[entry.name] = forms.ChoiceField(
required=False,
initial=entry.rating,
choices=CHOICES,
widget=forms.RadioSelect()
)

Use a SortedDict (djangos implementation of OrderedDict 2.7+)
https://github.com/django/django/blob/master/django/utils/datastructures.py

Related

How to create a customized filter search function in Django?

I am trying to create a filter search bar that I can customize. For example, if I type a value into a search bar, then it will query a model and retrieve a list of instances that match the value. For example, here is a view:
class StudentListView(FilterView):
template_name = "leads/student_list.html"
context_object_name = "leads"
filterset_class = StudentFilter
def get_queryset(self):
return Lead.objects.all()
and here is my filters.py:
class
StudentFilter(django_filters.FilterSet):
class Meta:
model = Lead
fields = {
'first_name': ['icontains'],
'email': ['exact'],
}
Until now, I can only create a filter search bar that can provide a list of instances that match first_name or email(which are fields in the Lead model). However, this does now allow me to do more complicated tasks. Lets say I added time to the filter fields, and I would like to not only filter the Lead model with the time value I submitted, but also other Lead instances that have a time value that is near the one I submitted. Basically, I want something like the def form_valid() used in the views where I can query, calculate, and even alter the values submitted.
Moreover, if possible, I would like to create a filter field that is not necessarily an actual field in a model. Then, I would like to use the submitted value to do some calculations as I filter for the list of instances. If you have any questions, please ask me in the comments. Thank you.
You can do just about anything by defining a method on the filterset to map the user's input onto a queryset. Here's one I did earlier. Code much cut down ...
The filter coat_info_contains is defined as a CharFilter, but it is further parsed by the method which splits it into a set of substrings separated by commas. These substrings are then used to generate Q elements (OR logic) to match a model if the substring is contained in any of three model fields coating_1, coating_2 and coating_3
This filter is not implicitly connected to any particular model field. The connection is through the method= specification of the filter to the filterset's method, which can return absolutely any queryset on the model that can be programmed.
Hope I haven't cut out anything vital.
import django_filters as FD
class MemFilter( FD.FilterSet):
class Meta:
model = MyModel
# fields = [fieldname, ... ] # default filters created for these. Not required if all declarative.
# fields = { fieldname: [lookup_expr_1, ...], ...} # for specifying possibly multiple lookup expressions
fields = {
'ft':['gte','lte','exact'], 'mt':['gte','lte','exact'],
...
}
# declarative filters. Lots and lots of
...
coat_info_contains = FD.CharFilter( field_name='coating_1',
label='Coatings contain',
method='filter_coatings_contains'
)
...
def filter_coatings_contains( self, qs, name, value):
values = value.split(',')
qlist = []
for v in values:
qlist.append(
Q(coating_1__icontains = v) |
Q(coating_2__icontains = v) |
Q(coating_3__icontains = v) )
return qs.filter( *qlist )

Using a Wagtail "ChoiceBlock" with dynamic choices rather than a hardcoded list

We have a setup with a Blog model that has a manytomany relation for BlogPageCategory, and we have a "recent blog posts" streamfield block that lets you specify whether to show cards for X latest blog posts, or X latest blog posts from a specific category.
As such, we started with the following code:
from wagtail.core import blocks
class RecentBlogEntries(blocks.StructBlock):
title = blocks.CharBlock(
required=True,
)
category_filter = blocks.ChoiceBlock(
label='Filter by Category',
required=False,
choices=[
('all', 'All'),
('First Category', 'First Category'),
('...',. '...'),
],
)
...
But hardcoding the categories is kind of silly, and being able to pick them from "what the list is, right now, based on the CMS data for BlogPageCategory" would be far more convenient. However, the following code (of course) turns into an equally hardcoded migration:
from wagtail.core import blocks
from ... import BlogPageCategory
class RecentBlogEntries(blocks.StructBlock):
title = blocks.CharBlock(
required=True,
)
choices = [ (cat.name, cat.name) for cat in BlogPageCategory.objects.all()]
choices.sort()
choices.insert(0, ('all', 'All'))
category_filter = blocks.ChoiceBlock(
label='Filter by Category',
required=False,
choices=choices,
)
...
Is there any way to make this a dynamic value instead of a list that is fixed by makemigrations?
ChoiceBlock accepts a callable function as the choices argument:
def get_categories():
return [(cat.name, cat.name) for cat in BlogPageCategory.objects.all()]
class RecentBlogEntries(blocks.StructBlock):
title = blocks.CharBlock(
required=True,
)
category_filter = blocks.ChoiceBlock(
label='Filter by Category',
required=False,
choices=get_categories,
)
The callable needs to be defined at the top level of a module so that the migration can make a reference to it (i.e. it can't be a method on a class), and if it gets subsequently moved or renamed, you'll need to edit the migration accordingly.

Filter on a field with choices

I have this field:
operation = models.CharField(max_length=10, choices=OPERATIONS)
Having this filter works:
class OperationFilter(django_filters.Filter):
def filter(self, qs, value):
try:
qs = qs.filter(operation=value.upper())
except:
pass
return qs
With url:
/api/v1/operation/?operation=CREATE
But having the default filter (without an extra OperationFilter) fails with:
{
"operation": [
"Select a valid choice. %(value)s is not one of the available choices."
]
}
Why is a filter on a field with choices failing?
For other, non-choice fields, default filters are working fine:
/api/v1/operation/?recipient=recipient-19
EDIT
The OPERATIONS:
from enum import Enum
def enum_as_choices(enum_class):
"""From an enum class, generate choices for a django field"""
return ((entry, entry.value) for entry in enum_class)
class OperationType(Enum):
CREATE = 'CREATE'
STATUS = 'STATUS'
EXPAND = 'EXPAND'
DELETE = 'DELETE'
OPERATIONS = enum_as_choices(OperationType)
You are using django_filters package, I suggest reading docs, since you already have support for this
https://django-filter.readthedocs.io/en/master/ref/filters.html#choicefilter
Just point out your choices to the value suggested by the other answers (or check the example in docs)
The choices you written would be converted to this pythonic representation:
(
('OperationType.CREATE', 'CREATE'),
('OperationType.STATUS', 'STATUS'),
('OperationType.EXPAND', 'EXPAND'),
('OperationType.DELETE', 'DELETE')
)
As you can see the actual values stored in your operation field (in DB) are 'OperationType.CREATE', etc.
So you should change your choices to normal constant choices or you should filter by something like 'OperationType.CREATE' which is not a good option IMO.
also you can change your enum_as_choices method like this:
def enum_as_choices(enum_class):
"""From an enum class, generate choices for a django field"""
return ((entry.name, entry.value) for entry in enum_class)
You haven't defined a blank/default choice in your OPERATIONS. To do so, add something like this:
OPERATIONS = (
('', 'NONE'),
# the rest of your choices here...
)
But you would also need to update your model to be:
operation = models.CharField(max_length=10, choices=OPERATIONS, default='NONE')

django model search form

Firstly, I did my homework and looked around before posting! My question seems like a very basic thing that must’ve been covered before.
I'm now looking at Django-filter as a potential solution, but would like some advice on if this is the right way to go and if there any other solutions.
I have a Django app wit 10 models, each model has a few fields. Most fields are ChoiceField that users populate using forms with the default select widget. There is a separate form for each model.
I want to create a separate form for each model (in separate views) that users will use to search the database. The search form will contain only drop-down boxes (the select widgets) with the same choices as the forms used to populate the database with the addition of the “any” option.
I know how to use .object.filter(), however the “any” option would correspond to not include specific fields in the filter and I'm not sure how to add model fields to the filter based on users’ selection
I briefly looked at Haystack as an option but it seems to be made for full text search rather than “model filed search” I'm after.
Sample model (simplified):
class Property():
TYPE_CHOICES = (‘apartment’, ‘house’, ‘flat’)
type = charfield(choices=TYPE_CHOICES)
LOC_CHOICES = (‘Brussels’, ‘London’, ‘Dublin’, ‘Paris’)
location = charfield(choices=LOC_CHOICES)
price = PostivieInteger()
Users can select only “type”, only “location” or both (not making selection is equal to ANY) in which case I end up with 3 different filters:
Property.objects.filter(type=’apartment’)
Property.objects.filter(location=’Dublin’)
Property.objects.filter(type=’apartment’, location=’Dublin’)
The main question: django-filter the best option?
Question 1: what’s the best option of accomplishing this overall?
Question 2: how do I add model fields to the filter based on user’s form selection?
Question 3: how do I do the filter based on user selection? (I know how to use .filter(price_lt=).exclude(price_gt=) but again how do I do it dynamically based on selection as “ANY” would mean this is not included in the query)
I had a similar case like yours (real estate project), I ended up with the following approach, you can refine this to your needs...I removed select_related and prefetch_related models for easier reading
properties/forms.py:
class SearchPropertyForm(forms.Form):
property_type = forms.ModelChoiceField(label=_("Property Type"), queryset=HouseType.objects.all(),widget=forms.Select(attrs={'class':'form-control input-sm'}))
location = forms.ModelChoiceField(label=_('Location'), queryset=HouseLocation.objects.all(), widget=forms.Select(attrs={'class':'form-control input-sm'}))
Then in the properties/views.py
# Create a Mixin to inject the search form in our context
class SeachPropertyMixin(object):
def get_context_data(self, **kwargs):
context = super(SeachPropertyMixin, self).get_context_data(**kwargs)
context['search_property_form'] = SearchPropertyForm()
return context
In your actual view (I apply the search form as a sidebar element in my detailview only:
# Use Class Based views, saves you a great deal of repeating code...
class PropertyView(SeachPropertyMixin,DetailView):
template_name = 'properties/view.html'
context_object_name = 'house'
...
queryset = HouseModel.objects.select_related(...).prefetch_related(...).filter(flag_active=True, flag_status='a')
Finally your search result view (this is performed as GET request, since we are not altering any data in our DB, we stick to the GET method):
# Search results should return a ListView, here is how we implement it:
class PropertySearchResultView(ListView):
template_name = "properties/propertysearchresults.html"
context_object_name = 'houses'
paginate_by = 6
queryset = HouseModel.objects.select_related(...).prefetch_related(...).order_by('-sale_price').filter(flag_active=True, flag_status='a')
def get_queryset(self):
qs = super(PropertySearchResultView,self).get_queryset()
property_type = self.request.GET.get('property_type')
location = self.request.GET.get('location')
'''
Start Chaining the filters based on the input, this way if the user has not
selected a filter it wont be used.
'''
if property_type != '' and property_type is not None:
qs = qs.filter(housetype=property_type)
if location != '' and location is not None:
qs = qs.filter(location=location)
return qs
def get_context_data(self, **kwargs):
context = super(PropertySearchResultView, self).get_context_data()
'''
Add the current request to the context
'''
context['current_request'] = self.request.META['QUERY_STRING']
return context
Your solution works. I've modified it and I'm not using ModelChoiceField but the standard form.ChoiceField. The reason for that is that I wanted to add option "Any". My "if" statements look like:
if locality != 'Any Locality':
qs = qs.filter(locality=locality)
if property_type != 'Any Type':
qs = qs.filter(property_type=property_type)
if int(price_min) != 0:
qs = qs.filter(price__gte=price_min)
if int(price_max) != 0:
qs = qs.filter(price__lte=price_max)
if bedrooms != 'Any Number':
qs = qs.filter(bedrooms=bedrooms)
And so on....
This does the job, however it seems like an ugly and hacky solution to a simple problem. I would think is a common use case. I feel there should be a cleaner solution...
I've tried the django-filter. It is close to doing what I want but I couldn't add the "Any" choice and it filters inline rather than returning. It should do with some modifications.
Cheers

Django: Get list of model fields?

I've defined a User class which (ultimately) inherits from models.Model. I want to get a list of all the fields defined for this model. For example, phone_number = CharField(max_length=20). Basically, I want to retrieve anything that inherits from the Field class.
I thought I'd be able to retrieve these by taking advantage of inspect.getmembers(model), but the list it returns doesn't contain any of these fields. It looks like Django has already gotten a hold of the class and added all its magic attributes and stripped out what's actually been defined. So... how can I get these fields? They probably have a function for retrieving them for their own internal purposes?
Django versions 1.8 and later:
You should use get_fields():
[f.name for f in MyModel._meta.get_fields()]
The get_all_field_names() method is deprecated starting from Django
1.8 and will be removed in 1.10.
The documentation page linked above provides a fully backwards-compatible implementation of get_all_field_names(), but for most purposes the previous example should work just fine.
Django versions before 1.8:
model._meta.get_all_field_names()
That should do the trick.
That requires an actual model instance. If all you have is a subclass of django.db.models.Model, then you should call myproject.myapp.models.MyModel._meta.get_all_field_names()
As most of answers are outdated I'll try to update you on Django 2.2
Here posts- your app (posts, blog, shop, etc.)
1) From model link: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/stable/ref/models/meta/
from posts.model import BlogPost
all_fields = BlogPost._meta.fields
#or
all_fields = BlogPost._meta.get_fields()
Note that:
all_fields=BlogPost._meta.get_fields()
Will also get some relationships, which, for ex: you can not display in a view.
As in my case:
Organisation._meta.fields
(<django.db.models.fields.AutoField: id>, <django.db.models.fields.DateField: created>...
and
Organisation._meta.get_fields()
(<ManyToOneRel: crm.activity>, <django.db.models.fields.AutoField: id>, <django.db.models.fields.DateField: created>...
2) From instance
from posts.model import BlogPost
bp = BlogPost()
all_fields = bp._meta.fields
3) From parent model
Let's suppose that we have Post as the parent model and you want to see all the fields in a list, and have the parent fields to be read-only in Edit mode.
from django.contrib import admin
from posts.model import BlogPost
#admin.register(BlogPost)
class BlogPost(admin.ModelAdmin):
all_fields = [f.name for f in Organisation._meta.fields]
parent_fields = BlogPost.get_deferred_fields(BlogPost)
list_display = all_fields
read_only = parent_fields
The get_all_related_fields() method mentioned herein has been deprecated in 1.8. From now on it's get_fields().
>> from django.contrib.auth.models import User
>> User._meta.get_fields()
I find adding this to django models quite helpful:
def __iter__(self):
for field_name in self._meta.get_all_field_names():
value = getattr(self, field_name, None)
yield (field_name, value)
This lets you do:
for field, val in object:
print field, val
This does the trick. I only test it in Django 1.7.
your_fields = YourModel._meta.local_fields
your_field_names = [f.name for f in your_fields]
Model._meta.local_fields does not contain many-to-many fields. You should get them using Model._meta.local_many_to_many.
It is not clear whether you have an instance of the class or the class itself and trying to retrieve the fields, but either way, consider the following code
Using an instance
instance = User.objects.get(username="foo")
instance.__dict__ # returns a dictionary with all fields and their values
instance.__dict__.keys() # returns a dictionary with all fields
list(instance.__dict__.keys()) # returns list with all fields
Using a class
User._meta.__dict__.get("fields") # returns the fields
# to get the field names consider looping over the fields and calling __str__()
for field in User._meta.__dict__.get("fields"):
field.__str__() # e.g. 'auth.User.id'
def __iter__(self):
field_names = [f.name for f in self._meta.fields]
for field_name in field_names:
value = getattr(self, field_name, None)
yield (field_name, value)
This worked for me in django==1.11.8
A detail not mentioned by others:
[f.name for f in MyModel._meta.get_fields()]
get, for example
['id', 'name', 'occupation']
and
[f.get_attname() for f in MyModel._meta.get_fields()]
get
['id', 'name', 'occupation_id']
If
reg = MyModel.objects.first()
then
reg.occupation
get, for example
<Occupation: Dev>
and
reg.occupation_id
get
1
MyModel._meta.get_all_field_names() was deprecated several versions back and removed in Django 1.10.
Here's the backwards-compatible suggestion from the docs:
from itertools import chain
list(set(chain.from_iterable(
(field.name, field.attname) if hasattr(field, 'attname') else (field.name,)
for field in MyModel._meta.get_fields()
# For complete backwards compatibility, you may want to exclude
# GenericForeignKey from the results.
if not (field.many_to_one and field.related_model is None)
)))
Just to add, I am using self object, this worked for me:
[f.name for f in self.model._meta.get_fields()]
At least with Django 1.9.9 -- the version I'm currently using --, note that .get_fields() actually also "considers" any foreign model as a field, which may be problematic. Say you have:
class Parent(models.Model):
id = UUIDField(primary_key=True)
class Child(models.Model):
parent = models.ForeignKey(Parent)
It follows that
>>> map(lambda field:field.name, Parent._model._meta.get_fields())
['id', 'child']
while, as shown by #Rockallite
>>> map(lambda field:field.name, Parent._model._meta.local_fields)
['id']
So before I found this post, I successfully found this to work.
Model._meta.fields
It works equally as
Model._meta.get_fields()
I'm not sure what the difference is in the results, if there is one. I ran this loop and got the same output.
for field in Model._meta.fields:
print(field.name)
In sometimes we need the db columns as well:
def get_db_field_names(instance):
your_fields = instance._meta.local_fields
db_field_names=[f.name+'_id' if f.related_model is not None else f.name for f in your_fields]
model_field_names = [f.name for f in your_fields]
return db_field_names,model_field_names
Call the method to get the fields:
db_field_names,model_field_names=get_db_field_names(Mymodel)
Combined multiple answers of the given thread (thanks!) and came up with the following generic solution:
class ReadOnlyBaseModelAdmin(ModelAdmin):
def has_add_permission(self, request):
return request.user.is_superuser
def has_delete_permission(self, request, obj=None):
return request.user.is_superuser
def get_readonly_fields(self, request, obj=None):
return [f.name for f in self.model._meta.get_fields()]
Why not just use that:
manage.py inspectdb
Example output:
class GuardianUserobjectpermission(models.Model):
id = models.IntegerField(primary_key=True) # AutoField?
object_pk = models.CharField(max_length=255)
content_type = models.ForeignKey(DjangoContentType, models.DO_NOTHING)
permission = models.ForeignKey(AuthPermission, models.DO_NOTHING)
user = models.ForeignKey(CustomUsers, models.DO_NOTHING)
class Meta:
managed = False
db_table = 'guardian_userobjectpermission'
unique_together = (('user', 'permission', 'object_pk'),)