Removed unneeded field_name checks within MigrationAutodetector.check_dependency(). #19598
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sarahboyce
commented
Jun 27, 2025
| @@ -1235,6 +1235,22 @@ def test_trim_apps(self): | |||
| self.assertEqual(changes["otherapp"][0].name, "0001_initial") | |||
| self.assertNotIn("thirdapp", changes) | |||
|
|
|||
| def test_check_dependency_invalid(self): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added to cover the ValueError but this is probably overkill and I'm happy to remove
6 tasks
charettes
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that making the adjustments here makes sense as they as unnecessary but I think there might be value in digging a bit more here.
Since Python doesn't have support for parameterized enums this makes me wonder if we're using the wrong abstraction here and we should rely on classes instead that implement a check method
e.g.
class OperationDependency:
def __init__(self, model_name):
self.model_name
@cached_property
def model_name_lower(self):
return self.model_name.lower()
def check(self, operation):
return False
class CreateModelDependency(OperationDependency):
def check(self, operation):
return (
isinstance(operation, operations.CreateModel)
and operation.name_lower == self.model_name_lower
)
...We could then simplify check_dependency to return dependency.check(operation)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
While testing #19361, I was checking whether the elif check could be simplified to check test coverage and make sure we don't add anything unnecessary.
There are some
OperationDependency.Typewhich are used for changes to both models and fields (such asOperationDependency.Type.CREATE) and some that are currently only used for changes to fields (such asOperationDependency.Type.REMOVE_ORDER_WRT).I want to confirm if always checking whether the field name is or isn't None is something we want by design or whether a small refactor is worthwhile.
This might be just a personal preference decision but thought I would ask 👍