Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ED4F890.70201@gmail.com>
References: <4ED4F890.70201@gmail.com>
From: Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:38:19 -0700
Subject: Re: Amateur question on class definitions...
To: jmarcedwards@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: python-list@python.org
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.3130.1322584732.27778.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 64
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:16397

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 8:21 AM, J. Marc Edwards <jmarcedwards@gmail.com> w=
rote:
> So I am defining my Python classes for a Django data model.=A0 I have a t=
he
> following class hierarchy and would value some expert input on how to bes=
t
> implement this.
>
> I have many instances of a particular class which I call a "workflow", e.=
g.
> wf_1, wf_2, wf_3, etc.
> These class instances of workflows can be combined into "composite
> workflows", e.g. {cwf_1 is comprised of wf1 & wf_3}, {cwf_2 is wf_2 and
> wf_3}, or {cwf_3 is just wf_2}, etc.
> The workflows that constitute the composite workflow is positionally
> dependent, i.e. if cwf_1 is comprised of wf_1 and wf_3, then wf_1 comes 1=
st
> AND wf_3 is 2nd.
> As I have many workflow instances that accumulate in my persistent databa=
se
> (Django data model), then the composite workflows become an ordered
> collection of workflow instances.
>
> My first thought here is that the composite workflow class should have a
> field that is a simple list of workflows, i.e. list(workflows), but I am
> somewhat unsure of how to code this correctly.
>
> Here is a sample pseudo-code...
>
> class a_workflow(models.Model):
> ...
>
> class composite_workflow(models.Model):
> =A0=A0=A0 ...a list of "a_workflows", i.e. a composite workflow, should I=
 use this
> syntax?
> =A0=A0=A0 set_of_workflows =3D list(a_workflow)
>
> Is this how a pro would do this?

That would work in general, but since these are Django models I assume
that this relationship will need to be stored in the database.  You'll
need to use a ManyToManyField instead.  I would do something like
this:

class Workflow(models.Model):
    pass

class CompositeWorkflow(models.Model):
    workflow_set =3D models.ManyToManyField('Workflow',
through=3D'CompositeWorkflowOrder')

class CompositeWorkflowOrder(models.Model):
    workflow =3D models.ForeignKey('Workflow')
    composite_workflow =3D models.ForeignKey('CompositeWorkflow')
    sequence_num =3D models.IntegerField()

The CompositeWorkflowOrder model is then responsible for tracking
which workflows are contained by which composite workflows, and in
what order they appear (using sequence_num).  See the Django docs on
ManyToManyFields for more info.

Cheers,
Ian