On 17 jun, 12:16, Patryk Zawadzki <pat...@pld-linux.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Roald <downa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 16 jun, 15:45, Ben Firshman <b...@firshman.co.uk> wrote: > >> The request is passed round so methods look like views to decorators. > >> Magically dropping it for decorators seems a bit scary. :/ > > > Just brainstorming: couldn't you have View derive from HttpRequest? > > Would you seriously recommend people to extend "int" when they want to > implement multiplication? :)
Nope. But the analogy doesn't hold. First: this is just brainstorming. Maybe it inspires someone for a better solution somehow. As you might know, I (still) favor deriving from HttpResponse Second: users will never extend HttpRequest directly, they will extend View. Third: It might be not even as weird as it looks on first sight. There's nothing wrong with 'response = request.get_response()', so why not just make 'get_response' the 'default function' of a request: response = request(). I admint that the name View might nog be the best in this case. Fourth: still, this is just brainstorming. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@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.
