Improve DecimalField
for easier subclassing.
#2695
Merged
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hello,
I did some cleanup in the DecimalField class to make the methods shorter and more focused on their responsibility, but the main goal is to allow developer do to something like this:
Without this refactor, covering such a use-case is quite ugly. You have to copy paste the
to_internal_value
to benefit for the sanity checks and then override the precision validation part:And if you think about it, it's not an obscure use-case at all. In my case, we are storing longitude and latitude values of up to 6 decimal places (~100 millimeters precision, which is more than enough for us) but the values can come from different geolocation sources which can have bigger precision and without this change we would have to sanitize the inputs on the client side. On each different client that you have. This way, I don't care about the infinitesimal precisions, I just grab the value, quantize it to the desired precision and store it in the database.
I like this sort of refactoring because if makes the code cleaner and the life of the developers easier. (I'm happy to do more of these if the community agrees that it's valuable).
Any thoughts?
Thanks!