On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 12:11:29AM +0530, Amit Upadhyay wrote: > Hi, > Wouldn't it be cool if we can say > user.save(email="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"), which will do the > equivalent of user.email = "[2] [EMAIL PROTECTED]"; user.save()?
Not really, no. :) Save is simple; why make it more complex? Could just as easily add a utility function that does this. Yes, would be two func calls- but personally, I don't see the gain in overloading save to do more then push the current (keyword there is 'current') state of the instance into the backend. Additional thought; it would make disabling/enabling sending of signals out of save not possible- the update would have to occur prior to the signal being sent, thus couldn't just wrap the save method on the fly. Either way, -1 personally since I just don't see the gain in making save more complex. ~harring
pgpeI7dFBROon.pgp
Description: PGP signature
