Prioritize getters instead of fieldnames when getting values from instance #19
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses
This Pull Request fixes a bug introduced with senaite/senaite.core#2471 because of the use of properties (e.g.
Manager
to let supermodel and impress overcome the fact that with dexterity, name fields are in lower case. However, when calling the property with supermodel, the system returns the object directly, instead of the function:When
Department
object was anArchetype
,self.get_field(name)
at line 223 would return the accessor to the fieldManager
, so the output ofprocess_value
would be returned instead.Since
Departmen
is no longerAT
, but aDX
, there is no fieldManager
and callingmodel.Manager
returns the object instead of the expectedSuperModel
, which leads to the following traceback insenaite.impress
:Therefore, this pull request ensures that functions are returned as-is, while non-functions are processed as expected.
Linked issue: senaite/senaite.impress#148
Current behavior before PR
Traceback when trying to publish a results report because the system expects a Supermodel to be returned by
model.Manager
atsenaite.impress.analysisrequest.model.managers
Desired behavior after PR is merged
No traceback. Report is published correctly
--
I confirm I have tested this PR thoroughly and coded it according to PEP8
and Plone's Python styleguide standards.