Pyramid is, to skip a lot of history, a successor to Pylons. It’s a Web framework for Python. (And there goes half my audience.) This post is about dispatch: mapping URLs to the code you want to run. (There goes the other half.)
Pyramid supports traditional URL routing, which looks like this:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 |
|
Gosh that’s a lot of things. The idea here is:
- If you visit
/cats
, Pyramid will find the route calledcats.list
. That route is attached to thecat_list
function, which will run, return a dict, and pass that off to thecat_list.mako
template for rendering. - If you visit
/cats/123
, Pyramid will findcat_view
instead. Theid
(here 123) will be inrequest.matchdict
; the function has to find the cat with that id and bail if it doesn’t exist. Then template blah blah blah.
Following? Excellent.
The immediate problem with this approach is what happens when you have a lot of cat-related URLs. Maybe you want to show a cat’s owner history and innoculations and cross-reference with funny cat videos on YouTube. Now you have:
1 2 3 4 5 6 |
|
That’s not too bad, except that now you have to do the get_cat
runaround in every one of these functions. For simple views, that’s going to be half the code you even run.
Okay, you say, so put that in a function called… uh, real_get_cat
. Great, except now what about when we expand our site to funny dog videos? Now we have another wrapper for getting a dog, and maybe one for getting rabbits. Meanwhile, we’re copy-pasting the /cats/{id}
prefix in all the routes—if we wanted to be more specific that ids are numeric, it gets even worse, with /cats/{id:\d+}
.
Consider URL generation, as well: you need to call request.route_url('cats.view', id=cat.id)
. Not so bad, I suppose, but manually plucking out the id everywhere you make a URL is a bit tedious. And it might be different for every kind of object; maybe dogs’ URLs use their names instead. You can add a pregenerator
to the add_route
call, though.
So now we have:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 |
|
This makes me kind of sad.
Alas, there is one last kink: I have shared comment functionality. You can have comments on cats, or comments on dogs. And there are several URLs relating to comments, for viewing and replying and so forth. So I need to put all those as well, once for each kind of thing comments can be attached to, and flail wildly to get the right kind of object in the actual comment code.
Enter traversal
Traversal is the thing Pyramid did before it had routing. The idea is that it works like a filesystem would: /foo/bar/baz
really means “find the foo
directory, then find the bar
directory in that, then find something called baz
in that”. In Pyramid, this is done with dictionary access: that same path is treated as root['foo']['bar']['baz']
.
So you might built your site like this:
1 2 3 4 5 |
|
Pyramid would look up each chunk of the path in order until it ran out of chunks or couldn’t go any further. Our example URL would reach that inner empty dictionary, which would become the “context”. The “view name” would be the next unused part, baz
, and anything else is considered the “subpath”. (There aren’t any other chunks here, so the subpath is an empty tuple.)
Instead of a route name, the view name and context’s class get used for finding the code to run. In practice, the above example isn’t very useful; you can’t easily tell those dict
s apart. You might want something more like this:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 |
|
Note that the context
argument is the traversal context: the last thing Pyramid found. I included the argument in the routing example, too, but it wasn’t anything useful there.
Now when we ask for /cats/123/owners
, the following happens:
- Start at the
site_root
. - Check for the key
cats
. Get aCatList
object back. - Check for the key
123
. Get aCat
object back. - Check for the key
owners
.Cat
objects don’t support subscripting, so stop here. TheCat
is the context;owners
is the view name; the subpath is empty again.
This is looking kind of promising. It’s more verbose, but since it’s all classes, I can add new ones with less effort than it takes to make a new set of routes. The code for finding a cat or bailing is in one obvious place; I have less copy/paste of arcane route declarations; and I can do my comments structure fairly easily, by just making both Cat
and Dog
return a CommentList
sort of object that remembers the cat/dog I already found.
The Bad, The Ugly
So I tried actually applying this to floof. It seemed like such a nice idea, really. Obviously I wouldn’t be writing this if I hadn’t hit a ton of roadblocks.
-
The subpath. There’s no way to match against it in
@view_config
, nor any way to disable it. This means that/cats/123/owners
does exactly the same thing as/cats/123/owners/durp/blah/foo/junk/whatever
. The extra stuff just gets tucked away inrequest.subpath
. Maybe I shouldn’t care, but this really bothers me. -
There’s no way to force a 404 within traversal; a node/resource can only say “I contain this” or “I don’t contain this”. So if you request
/cats/456
, but there’s no cat number 456, Pyramid will makeCatList
the context and456
the view name. -
Naturally, it’s possible to take a context object and get back a URL:
request.resource_url(cat, 'owners')
for cat number 123 will theoretically generate/cats/123/owners
.Alas, this works by looking at
__name__
and__parent__
properties on the context object; here__name__
should be 123 and__parent__
should be someCatList()
, which will have its own name and parent. If you’re using some existing classes as context (say, SQLAlchemy objects), then these properties won’t be there! You can add a@property
to the classes to generate them, but why on Earth would I want my data to contain references to my URL structure?Another alternative is to create a
CatPage
class to wrap the actual cat object and put the special properties on that class, instead… but then you can’t callresource_url()
on an arbitrary cat object! You have to wrap it manually, instead. -
request.resource_url(cat, 'owners')
produces/cats/123/owners
.request.resource_url(cat)
produces/cats/123/
. The rationale is something about “relative URLs in your page” that makes no sense to me at all. -
If you write
request.route_url('cats.foo')
, andcats.foo
isn’t a known route name, the page will just fail to render. This is fantastic: you can catch bad URLs almost immediately. Unfortunately,request.resource_url(cat, 'foo')
won’t check whether there’s a view namedfoo
forCat
objects; you’ll just find out, maybe, when it 404s.
Dammit
Neither routing nor traversal seems to reflect how anyone builds Web applications—or at least not how I build Web applications.
Routing works well for a few pages with specific URLs, but doing anything structured requires a lot of repetition—and while you could wrap routing in loops and functions, that rapidly becomes confusing to read, losing one of the advantages of routing in the first place.
Traversal works well for serving files from a directory, but… honestly, not much else! Every problem listed above seems to reflect a bias towards serving an actual filesystem.
Pyramid does have a lot of hooks; it’s possible to replace the traversal mechanism entirely. I just don’t really want to do that to get around these strange little problems. A lot of the resource stuff also assumes pretty firmly that you’re using the __parent__
mechanism.
I have URLs that represent objects. They look like /things/identifier
. Sometimes that’s followed by a page name (/posts/123/edit
). Sometimes that’s followed by a representation of a child object (/posts/123/attachments/456
). Isn’t this pretty common? Why is it so hard?