Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Jul 22, 2006, at 9:37 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > Rather than watch the "inherit from User" thread go round and round, > > maybe I should give people something more concrete to think about.
First of all, +1 on this proposal. I've been approaching this problem from different ways for the past couple of weeks, and had settled on a very similar one to implement myself. I was suffering from a lack of examples of how to use the content type app though. > > (2) Any strong reason not to include this case? It's only for > > "advanced > > use", since there are a few ways to shoot yourself in the foot (e.g. > > declare a class abstract, create the tables, remove the abstract > > declaration, watch code explode). However, it will be useful in some > > cases. [I have some scripts to help with converting non-abstract > > inheritance to abstract and vice-versa at the database level, too.] > > I think abstract base classes are *key*, actually -- nearly every use > I'm thinking of includes 'em. . . . > So I'd get back an iterator that yields Things, Animals, and Toys? > That's what I'd expect, and want. I also think keeping the abstract class as a way of aggregating all the subclasses is key. An iterator is exactly what I would like to see as well. Please post any examples / code as they come! David Blewett --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
