Fix NotImplementedError message: Field to_internal_value and to_representation #6996
Conversation
This file contains 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
rpkilby
approved these changes
Oct 21, 2019
|
Thanks! |
pchiquet
pushed a commit
to pchiquet/django-rest-framework
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 17, 2020
sigvef
pushed a commit
to sigvef/django-rest-framework
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
If you don't implement
to_representationin yourFieldsubclass, you get a friendly error message suggesting that you might want to subclassReadOnlyFieldinstead. However, by not implementingto_representationyou would have effectively made the fieldwrite_only, so the error message would be misleading (unless I'm horribly mixed up for some reason. Feel free to tell me that my head is on backwards :D)Also making sure both errors have the field name for consistency's sake.