Hi,
No, not another whinge - maybe there's life in @validate yet!
Locally to my project, I have a refactored @validate decorator sitting
in my lib/base.py, with most of the work of what was previously a 100+
line function extracted to methods on BaseController. What's left of
the function lis shown at the end of this message - the extracted
methods are obvious enough if you have seen the original function.
The JSON twist: The new _get_decoded() method adds the ability to
handle request bodies sent in JSON, and the new
_handle_validation_errors() method will render errors in JSON if
that's the format the client wants to accept. Just a couple of lines
in each case.
In my controllers, "show" and "list" actions needed a small change to
render JSON if requested, but the create and update actions needed no
change at all. Model objects all gained a to_dict() method, used by
the controllers to provide input to the json rendering. In the
objects I most care about, the dict representation was tweaked a
little by hand. Very modest effort for a basic JSON API I think.
This new @validate is clearly more extensible than the old one but I
still wonder about the extension interface. For example, does the
request parsing bit (especially the JSON part) belong here, in (say)
an extensible or otherwise format-aware request object, or somewhere
else - a new validation or form object, say?
While we're here, I'm thinking of a Routes enhancement (in the form of
a personal extension if no-one else likes the idea) that allows a
{.format} syntax - already proposed to the URI Template people - as a
parameter style for optional format extensions. The removal of large
numbers of "formatted routes" might even yield a small performance
benefit for some people, but even if it doesn't, I for one will be
pleased to help see some duplication disappear. Meanwhile I have only
header-based conneg, which gets a bit tedious at times!
Finally, I would like a more sophisticated conneg function than my
current accepts_json(request), but before I start to write one, surely
such things exist already?
Regards,
Mike
m...@asplake.co.uk
http://positiveincline.com
http://twitter.com/asplake
def validate(schema=None, validators=None, form=None,
variable_decode=False,
dict_char='.', list_char='-', post_only=True, state=None,
on_get=False, **htmlfill_kwargs):
"""The Pylons @validate decorator refactored, with most of the
work done
by controller methods defined on BaseController. Enhanced to
accept JSON.
"""
if state is None:
state = PylonsFormEncodeState
def wrapper(func, self, *args, **kwargs):
"""Decorator Wrapper function"""
request = self._py_object.request
# Skip the validation if on_get is False and its a GET
if not on_get and request.environ['REQUEST_METHOD'] == 'GET':
return func(self, *args, **kwargs)
decoded = self._get_decoded(
variable_decode, dict_char, list_char,
post_only)
self.form_result, self.form_errors = self._convert(
decoded, schema, validators, state,
variable_decode, dict_char, list_char)
if self.form_errors:
return self._handle_validation_errors(func, decoded,
self.form_errors,
form,
htmlfill_kwargs,
args, kwargs)
else:
return func(self, *args, **kwargs)
return decorator(wrapper)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-disc...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
