Done

[Django] #15939 <http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15939>:
SignedIntegerField? <http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/SignedIntegerField>
 / 
UnsignedIntegerField?<http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/UnsignedIntegerField>
as
part of the core fields.py

[Django] #15940 <http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15940>: Patch database
documentation to explain why using sql_mode=strict is important




On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Mathieu AGOPIAN
<mathieu.agop...@gmail.com>wrote:

> I really can't tell if those two new fields would be integrated in
> core, either wait for feedback here, and/or give it a try with a
> ticket (and i'm pretty sure it'll land in "Design Decision Needed").
>
> On May 1, 2:42 pm, "Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]"
> <cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:
> > Yeah, subclassing sounds the way forward. I was thinking something like:
> >
> > SignedIntegerField = IntegerField(min_value=–2147483648, max_value=
> > 2147483647)
> > UnsignedIntegerField = IntegerField(min_value=0, max_value=4294967295)
> >
> > Do you think there would be much chance in having these two field types
> > included in the core? If so, should I create a patch for fields.py and
> > submit??
> >
> > As for the MySQL strict mode, I'll submit a documentation patch, and see
> if
> > it gets accepted :)
> >
> > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Mathieu AGOPIAN
> > <mathieu.agop...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > For reference, this discussion is linked to
> >
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread.
> ..
> > > and to the tickethttp://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15923
> >
> > > Cal,
> >
> > > The only thing that i could imagine regarding "fixing" this issue
> > > would indeed be a documentation addition in the MySQL (or MySQLdb)
> > > part of thehttp://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/databases/page,
> > > explaining the possible issue with integers that are too large to fit
> > > in the appropriate mysql column (though i'm not sure how all this
> > > works, as i'm far from a MySQL or ORM expert).
> > > Specifically, explaining how to set the sql_mode to "traditional" as
> > > explained by kmtracey (http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/
> > > 15923#comment:10) I believe.
> >
> > > Let's see if there's anyone reading this mailing list showing interest
> > > about this, and/or feel free to create a feature request on trac, and
> > > see if it's accepted.
> >
> > > On a side note, as python doesn't seem to have any issue with large
> > > integers, i guess you could subclass the IntegerField, and add to it's
> > > validation a check to see if the resulting integer can be stored in a
> > > 32 bits using either a simple comparison, like the following:
> > >    -int('1' * 31, 2) < int(field_value) < int('1' * 31, 2)
> >
> > > Mathieu
> >
> > > On Apr 30, 8:31 pm, "Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]"
> > > <cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Hey Mathieu,
> >
> > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply. I'm starting to see now why the
> core
> > > > devs are reluctant to modify IntegerField.
> >
> > > > I'm wondering if maybe Django should have a SignedIntegerField and
> > > > UnsignedIntegerField as part of the core (for those that wish to have
> > > > enforced 32-bit integers), with the same INT_MIN and INT_MAX from
> > > limits.h (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limits.h). But there again,
> would
> > > this be
> > > > considered un-pythonic or against the ethics of Django?
> >
> > > > I guess really it should be up to MySQL to have strict mode by
> default.
> > > But,
> > > > as this is unlikely to happen, could we perhaps consider having a
> > > commented
> > > > out entry in the settings.py file that allows you to set strict mode
> for
> > > all
> > > > SQL connections? Or, perhaps a documentation change, which explains
> > > easily
> > > > to the user how to do it (Kinda like the storage_engine thing
> onhttp://
> > > docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/databases/#creating-your-tables) .
> >
> > > > Let me know your thoughts :)
> >
> > > > Cal
> >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Mathieu AGOPIAN
> > > > <mathieu.agop...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > > > Hello,
> >
> > > > > I'm afraid there isn't such a thing as "a valid signed value", if
> we're
> > > > > still talking about "size wise".
> >
> > > > > For django (python), the integer you gave in the ticket is
> perfectly
> > > valid.
> > > > > Here's a way for you to check that :
> > > > > >>> s = '351760125423456632454565345363453423453465345453'
> > > > > >>> int(s)
> > > > > 351760125423456632454565345363453423453465345453L
> >
> > > > > And indeed, an IntegerField validates that the content of the field
> can
> > > be
> > > > > converted to an int this way (check django/forms/fields.py line
> 230).
> >
> > > > > So definitely, as Alex pointed, this is an issue on MySQL's side,
> not
> > > > > Django's.
> > > > > I believe this can't (shan't?) be fixed at Django's level, as
> there's
> > > no
> > > > > "size" limitation for the IntegerField, as you would have on a
> > > CharField
> > > > > with the *max_length* attribute.
> >
> > > > > And no, limiting the length of the string won't work, as
> "2147483647"
> > > isn't
> > > > > the same length as "-2147483647", but is the same length as
> > > "9999999999" (if
> > > > > we're taking the example of 2^32-1 as the max SIGNED INT value).
> >
> > > > > my two cents ;)
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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.
> >
> > > --
> > > 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to