On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I share James' reservations about this as a feature -- attaching flags to
> Meta is something I can see being abused in all sorts of ways -- but that
> doesn't mean there's no legitimate uses for extensions to Meta. For example,
> the USERNAME_FIELD added in support of custom users should, arguably, be a
> Meta option -- but there was no way we could add that without making a Meta
> option available to every class.
For what it's worth, I've loosely copied Django's "metaclass w/ Meta options"
pattern for several projects. In cases where I needed a bit more flexibility,
the metaclass looked for a well named attribute on the class that would specify
the options class to use. For example:
class Model(object):
# _meta is a ModelOptions instance
__OPTIONS_CLASS__ = ModelOptions
class Foo(Model):
# _meta is a ModelOptions instance, inheriting Model's __OPTION_CLASS__
class User(Model):
# _meta is a UserModelOptions instance that looks
# for a USERNAME_FIELD option
__OPTIONS_CLASS__ = UserModelOptions
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
