Hi Cal, When we proposed to add get_or_none() , we actually ended up adding a first() -method. The primary motives were to have a clearer name and to stay in line with other existing api's.
In my opinion, get_or_none is too much a duplicate of first and I am therefore -1 of it being added. For those interested, I will copy the message of BDFL Jacob here: Hi! After thinking a bit, I'm +1 on the idea, and I think `Queryset.first()` is the right name (which implies we should probably have a `last()` for completion). This mirrors the name used by a few other ORM/collection APIs that I think have really nice APIS: * SQLalchemy (http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/rel_0_7/orm/query.html#sqlalchemy.orm.query.Query.first) * Storm (http://people.canonical.com/~therve/storm/storm.store.ResultSet.html#first) * Backbone (http://backbonejs.org/#Collection-Underscore-Methods / http://documentcloud.github.com/underscore/#first) If someone produces a patch I'll review it and commit it. Jacob This was written as a response to Anssi's message: For the record, I still do like this idea, specifically .get_or_none(). It seems there is significant support for this idea. I do think this method is Pythonic. There are cases where no match from get() isn't exceptional, and in such cases try-except just feels wrong. The counter argument is that this is API bloat, and this will set an example for more API bloat. In the end this is a decision with almost no technical considerations and a lot of "good taste" considerations. So, this seems like BDFL area. If there are no signs from BDFL that .get_or_none() is acceptable, then lets bury this one. If it is acceptable, then I am willing to do all the work to get this committed. - Anssi The whole thread is here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/django-developers/get_or_none$20jacob$20first/django-developers/3RwDxWKPZ_A/KNzxgP8L-V0J Regards, Wim On Wednesday, 26 March 2014 13:19:47 UTC+1, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < > rus...@keith-magee.com <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Florian Apolloner >> <f.apo...@gmail.com<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> On Thursday, March 20, 2014 2:01:25 PM UTC+1, Cal Leeming [Simplicity >>> Media Ltd] wrote: >>>> >>>> I'll give it a couple more days for a BDFL to gives the thumbs up/down. >>>> >>> >>> Well, we don't have BDFLs anymore and Shai already said he is -0 on it, >>> count me in with a relatively strong -0 too. I'd be a bit more open to it >>> if you could a better name. That said I generally agree with Shai about the >>> validation, eg this should be handled by the database constraints already >>> -- otherwise selecting via get doesn't make much sense imo. >>> >> >> Count me as a -0 as well. I simply don't see the problem with catching >> exceptions. Changing the name doesn't modify my objections. >> > > Then why did first() [1] get added? The only difference is that first() > adds a reference to [0], but it still saves the equal amount of code and is > still there for the same reasons of convenience, no? > > [1] > https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/querysets/#django.db.models.query.QuerySet.first > > >> >> I'm probably a true neutral 0 on a django.shortcuts method mirroring >> get_object_or_404 (which, BTW, is what the way-back-in-2007 thread was >> proposing). I still don't see the point, but at least it's in a shortcuts >> module, and clearly labelled as such, not a method on a manager duplicating >> existing functionality. >> >> Yours, >> Russ Magee %-) >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Django developers" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to >> django-d...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJxq84_rYfpfSGicAKFDrLdtTKW9q1tr%2BM03xXx_qRCi4usTEw%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJxq84_rYfpfSGicAKFDrLdtTKW9q1tr%2BM03xXx_qRCi4usTEw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/1ef75fc6-90c2-4d70-9aa0-d2c1cac25c49%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
