Proof of Concept: Dynamically Generated DataModels #221
Conversation
WilliamJamieson
changed the title
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #221 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 96.74% 96.88% +0.14%
==========================================
Files 29 31 +2
Lines 2398 2379 -19
==========================================
- Hits 2320 2305 -15
+ Misses 78 74 -4
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| A DataModel object class | ||
| """ | ||
| if hasattr(_mixins, mixin := f"{datamodel_name}Mixin"): | ||
| class_type = (DataModel, getattr(_mixins, mixin)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a bug here, things like the
get_primary_array_name cannot be properly overridden as desired.
This is because the "order" of inheritance in Python is right to left meaning it applies the right most class structure first then proceeds to the left. Thus for the get_primary_array_name example the Mixin will load its version and then it will be overloaded by the DataModel object. This is the reverse of what we want.
This should not effect anything added by the Mixin (as one would normally do), but since this is the way I am dynamically injecting alterations to dynamically created objects, we need to pay attention to this ordering.
WilliamJamieson
force-pushed
the
feature/dynamic_datamodels
branch
6 times, most recently
from
88518bc
to
492c1a5
Compare
WilliamJamieson
force-pushed
the
feature/dynamic_datamodels
branch
6 times, most recently
from
cadbc20
to
9c8ba9a
Compare
WilliamJamieson
force-pushed
the
feature/dynamic_datamodels
branch
from
9c8ba9a
to
19ebd6c
Compare
|
|
||
| def get_primary_array_name(self): | ||
| """ | ||
| Returns the name "primary" array for this model, which |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be changed to reflect that it is the override, rather than intended to be overridden.
|
|
||
| def get_primary_array_name(self): | ||
| """ | ||
| Returns the name "primary" array for this model, which |
WilliamJamieson
force-pushed
the
feature/dynamic_datamodels
branch
3 times, most recently
from
124d00f
to
af4e8d9
Compare
get_primary_array_name is currently not functional, these tests will detect when it starts functioning
WilliamJamieson
force-pushed
the
feature/dynamic_datamodels
branch
from
af4e8d9
to
5ca92e1
Compare
After the roman tag-up this week (22 June 2023), I was left wondering how difficult would it be to dynamically generate the datamodels from RAD now that the
datamodel_namemeta data has been added to the schemas.As it turns out, this is not that difficult if one builds on the proposed changes in PRs #213 and #214 (This PR is based off a a rebase of #214 onto #213). This PR move the datamodels from being statically defined in code to dynamic code generation as discussed.
Checklist
CHANGES.rstunder the corresponding subsection