📝 Update documentation to refer to list instead of List (#1147)

Co-authored-by: Sofie Van Landeghem <svlandeg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: svlandeg <svlandeg@github.com>
This commit is contained in:
bubbletroubles
2025-03-01 00:58:52 +11:00
committed by GitHub
parent a82c3fe964
commit 1bd5f27ed4
5 changed files with 8 additions and 8 deletions

View File

@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ And this ends up *requiring* the same **circular imports** that are not supporte
But these **type annotations** we want to declare are not needed at *runtime*.
In fact, remember that we used `List["Hero"]`, with a `"Hero"` in a string?
In fact, remember that we used `list["Hero"]`, with a `"Hero"` in a string?
For Python, at runtime, that is **just a string**.

View File

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ For example, we can pass the same `Hero` **SQLModel** class (because it is also
We can also use other type annotations, the same way we can use with Pydantic fields. For example, we can pass a list of `Hero`s.
First, we import `List` from `typing` and then we declare the `response_model` with `List[Hero]`:
To do so, we declare the `response_model` with `list[Hero]`:
{* ./docs_src/tutorial/fastapi/response_model/tutorial001_py310.py ln[40:44] hl[40] *}

View File

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Let's see the `Team` model, it's almost identical as before, but with a little c
{* ./docs_src/tutorial/many_to_many/tutorial001_py310.py ln[9:14] hl[14] *}
The **relationship attribute `heroes`** is still a list of heroes, annotated as `List["Hero"]`. Again, we use `"Hero"` in quotes because we haven't declared that class yet by this point in the code (but as you know, editors and **SQLModel** understand that).
The **relationship attribute `heroes`** is still a list of heroes, annotated as `list["Hero"]`. Again, we use `"Hero"` in quotes because we haven't declared that class yet by this point in the code (but as you know, editors and **SQLModel** understand that).
We use the same **`Relationship()`** function.
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ We **removed** the previous `team_id` field (column) because now the relationshi
The relationship attribute is now named **`teams`** instead of `team`, as now we support multiple teams.
It is no longer an `Optional[Team]` but a list of teams, annotated as **`List[Team]`**.
It is no longer an `Optional[Team]` but a list of teams, annotated as **`list[Team]`**.
We are using the **`Relationship()`** here too.

View File

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ And in the `Team` class, the `heroes` attribute is annotated as a list of `Hero`
/// tip
There's a couple of things we'll check again in some of the next chapters, about the `List["Hero"]` and the `back_populates`.
There's a couple of things we'll check again in some of the next chapters, about the `list["Hero"]` and the `back_populates`.
But for now, let's first see how to use these relationship attributes.

View File

@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
## About the String in `List["Hero"]`
## About the String in `list["Hero"]`
In the first Relationship attribute, we declare it with `List["Hero"]`, putting the `Hero` in quotes instead of just normally there:
In the first Relationship attribute, we declare it with `list["Hero"]`, putting the `Hero` in quotes instead of just normally there:
{* ./docs_src/tutorial/relationship_attributes/define_relationship_attributes/tutorial001_py310.py ln[1:19] hl[9] *}
What's that about? Can't we just write it normally as `List[Hero]`?
What's that about? Can't we just write it normally as `list[Hero]`?
By that point, in that line in the code, the Python interpreter **doesn't know of any class `Hero`**, and if we put it just there, it would try to find it unsuccessfully, and then fail. 😭