#django

well obviously, that is how rows generally look like

better stop wasting you time if you still have something else to learn

well i will have another project

if i finish this one

try this: User.objects.filter(followed__user = current_user)

it is the last bit of thing i am having trouble with

I've forgot again, but I think this should work

oh

let me try

see if it gives error

it gave

Cannot query "username": Must be "FollowModel" instance.

eh, where did username come from

i did as you said followings = User.objects.filter(follower=current_user)

and than tried t print it

thats wher eit broke

I wrote very different code

oh the `followed__user ` was intentional ?

i taught you forgot the model field name

well it gave the same error

and the username comes from this line `current_user = get_object_or_404(User, pk=request.user.id)`

pin

ping

lordofthekebabs: please read the topic and supply the requested information (all of it)

yeah, post your full code now and traceback too better, it's something different probably

alrighty

do you mind if i send you the github repo ?

If I confused complex queries again it would complain about not being able to resolve name into field or something like that

or just the view in a dppaste

Whatever makes me see the code in acceptable format (irc being not acceptable code formatter)

okay a sec im pushing the code

https://github.com/demirantay/twitter-clone/blo... its on the line 481

let me paste the tracebaack

https://dpaste.de/HqVG Fuyou https://dpaste.de/HqVG

Fuyou sorry my internet got disconnected for a second

damn, those names confuse me, a moment please ^_^"

Fuyou thats okay thanks a lot for trying to help :)

Greetings all. I have a question about best practices, related to the ORM. I teach my development team this is the 'standard style' https://dpaste.de/emvg, but I don't know that I can point to a particular document(s) that define "standard".

I believe your try\except hides the original error, though I think my line was incorrect here

nevertheless

oh my bad

User.objects.filter(followed__follower = current_user) ty this

outside of try: preferably

alright a sec

They submitted some code that uses this approach -- Model.object.filter(pk=pk).first().. and I'm like that's not the standard way to do it.. but then, I'd like to be able to point them at some reference for "standard". If anyone knows of a good reference or two along these lines, I'd appreciate the links

Hello

How django know about '[:5]' in 'Article.objects.all()[:5]'. I thought django will get all articles, and then python slice it. But not. Django add LIMIT 5 to the SQL query.

oh yes Fuyou it worked

How is it possible?

thank you very much but what is this way much more advanced level of querying that i dont have to worry about for now?

i didnt see any of this magic in tutorials

Papinak: because you can control what slicing does in python

Papinak: For a given object type, you can customize what [x] does.

+apollo13 Oh. thanks.

lordofthekebabs_, it would be a bit more simple if you actually used a many-to-many field, it would simplify a bit. And your related names were not chosen in a best way

+apollo13: Can you send me link for that? I can't find it.

lordofthekebabs_, ok, so it returned all followed users?

yes it did but

now how would i user this in the for loop ? in the temp

Papinak: https://github.com/django/django/blob/master/dj...

lordofthekebabs_, wait a moment, it was the hardest part, but now we need a finishing step

Thank you! :)

Fuyou alright i am listening

TweetModel.objects.filter(user__in=following)

given that following is that var with queryset we got before

alright im going to name this var `home_feed`

a sec

I'd rather name it so it explains what kind of object it contains. But whatever makes sense to you

well Fuyou it worked but still when i print it it is grouped by the sets

it goes like

user1 , user1, user1 and user2, user2, uer2

but it is one queryset which is what i intended

lordofthekebabs_, ok, but now it is single queryset

yes

you can order_by(...) on it

oh alright let me try

.order_by('publish_date')

and it only 2 queries instead of how many you did before

Fuyou :))))) IT works

GOD yes thanks a lot

maybe could be brought to one, but I guess 2 should be fine for now

but still i didnt do anything :P

But thank you alot i was trying to do this for 2-3 hours

ahahah have a nice night

lordofthekebabs_, yeah, I'd rather not code for you, but I wasn't quite sure for exact line myself this time

Fuyou well maybe it is just for this time

important part - did you get the idea in step #1?

but thanks again

well yes but you used some magical complex querying

which i did not see before

filter(followed__follower = current_user)

yes

"followed" part here is related_name, see?

https://github.com/demirantay/twitter-clone/blo... from here

okay i dont even know what related name is doing i just used it since the dj debug gave a hint

ooooooooooohhhhhh

it just clicked

but why not just use filter(follower=current_user)

isnt it the same thing

why add the related name

it's like "FollowingModel has followed User -that means-> User has number of FollowingModel instances which will be addressed by related_name=followed"

oh its like a bad many to many trleation ship ?

thats why you were saying use many to many

why bad? As I said what you have implemented is basically a many-to-many. You just didn't use a convenience shortcut which is ManyToManyField

now i get it

again thank you a lot for taking your time to help me

have a nice day :)

so User has 'followed' field, which return queryset of FollowingModel's which you can query on FollowingModel.follower

now i understand why you said i should name them better

Well, it takes some time to sink in, it did for me at least

ahah :)

i m gonna quit now but thanks again

have a nice day