On Wednesday 17 August 2005 10:32 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Howdy everyone --
Hey Jacob!
> I think I was the driving force behind rejecting this ticket --
> Adrian's still 50/50 as far as I know -- so let me explain why I
> don't like it.
I think that just about everything can be answered
Okay, so I am definitely +1 on the proposal, I liked the more Pythonic
syntax a lot. I was a bit shocked when I saw the change on ticket #122
this morning, because I was hoping it would get incorporated. I would
still like for it to be incorporated in some different way, so that we
can have both.
On 8/17/05, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Howdy everyone --
>
> I think I was the driving force behind rejecting this ticket --
> Adrian's still 50/50 as far as I know -- so let me explain why I
> don't like it.
>
> Actually, before I do, I should say that in the end it's rea
Howdy everyone --
I think I was the driving force behind rejecting this ticket --
Adrian's still 50/50 as far as I know -- so let me explain why I
don't like it.
Actually, before I do, I should say that in the end it's really
Adrian's decision in that I'll defer to his judgement should h
On Wednesday 17 August 2005 09:59 pm, Robin Munn wrote:
> If/when you do write a wrapper, please post it to the ticket as well.
> If we can't persuade Adrian and Jacob to see sense *wink*, it'll be
> handy to have an alternative.
Of course! I'll see how the current discussion on IRC turns out be
On 8/17/05, Matthew Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My thoughts exactly. In fact, that is the primary reason why I would want
> this included in django. For my own use, it really doesn't matter. I can
> use the syntax with a wrapper, even it if isn't included.
If/when you do write a wrap
On Wednesday 17 August 2005 09:28 pm, Robin Munn wrote:
> On 8/17/05, Matthew Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By that, do you mean an alternate class to inherit from? E.g., instead of
>
> class Person(meta.Model):
> fields = (
> meta.CharField('name', maxlength=50),
> )
>
> I
On 8/17/05, Matthew Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As what I did in this patch really doesn't need to be ingrained into django
> itself, I was intending to move it into a wrapper class this evening. This
> would allow the use of this new syntax without requiring any change to
> django, so
On Wednesday 17 August 2005 06:06 pm, Robin Munn wrote:
> The argument that there's too much "magic" going on behind the scenes
> leaves me puzzled. Isn't there already lots of "magic" going on
> setting up the assorted get_foo_list() functions for ForeignKeys and
> ManyToManyFields? Why not add a
On 11-08-2005, at 11:39, Nebojša Đorđević - nesh wrote:
This is done calling setup_locale() from HttpRequest inside
*Request constructor because *Request classes don't call base class
(HttpRequest) constructor.
Update:
I just found-out that this is not correct way to do it :(
When I try to
I was disappointed to see http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/122
rejected. In the hopes that it may not be too late to change Adrian's
and Jacob's minds, I'd like to advance an argument in favor of
reversing that decision and accepting the patch.
The difference between:
class Person(meta.Model
11 matches
Mail list logo
