On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
<malc...@pointy-stick.com> wrote:
> Kind of disappointed that none of the other "commit at will" people have
> chimed in on this one (Adrian? Jacob? Russell? Bueller?...) I suspect
> I'm going to lose, but I'd genuinely like to know that there's something
> more than apathy behind the approval to add this.
I've mostly stayed out because it's not something I feel strongly
about, but I am +0 on the change. The reason I don't much care is that
it really comes down to a lines of code argument; is::
obj.update(x=1, y=2, z=3)
really that much "better" than::
obj.x = 1
obj.y = 2
obj.z = 3
obj.save()
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I *do* prefer the previous, but
really not by a whole lot.
Really, though, I can't see much of a reason *not* to add it. The only
``update`` methods I've got that this would clash with is an
``update(**kwargs)`` I've written myself; this would replace it. A
quick poke through Google's code search doesn't find any (public)
Django code that seems to have an update method.
The same argument here, either way, goes for update_or_create, btw.
Let's not "compromise" and just take one or the other; that'd just be
silly. One or the other, please.
Jacob
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
