On Nov 30, 9:51 pm, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Django 1.1: JSON serialization looks for system json/simplejson
> first, fall back to django.utils.simplejson if not found and warn
> with PendingDeprecationWarning whenever django.utils.simplejson is
> used.
>
> * Django
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have to say I agree with Malcolm. I don't believe we are currently
> hampered in any real way by bundling an old version of the SimpleJSON
> library, and it doesn't take that much effort to update the bundled
>
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 23:51 -0600, James Bennett wrote:
>> Apologies for bringing this up past the 1.1 feature deadline, but
>> since this isn't a feature perhaps it'll be OK :)
>>
>> Currently, Django bundles a
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 20:49 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> > I wouldn't mind testing for the C version and importing that
> > conditionally, since Bob Ippolito does mention 10 - 150x speed ups for
> > string processing there (quite believable for Python vs. C with
> > intensive string
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 23:51 -0600, James Bennett wrote:
> Apologies for bringing this up past the 1.1 feature deadline, but
> since this isn't a feature perhaps it'll be OK :)
>
> Currently, Django bundles a copy of simplejson[1], at
> django.utils.simplejson. We use this solely in the
Apologies for bringing this up past the 1.1 feature deadline, but
since this isn't a feature perhaps it'll be OK :)
Currently, Django bundles a copy of simplejson[1], at
django.utils.simplejson. We use this solely in the serialization
system to support dumping to and loading from JSON fixtures.
Christian Schilling wrote:
> yes, i merged that, ran my old tests against the fixed version and
> found a bug in the fix..
> so, i recreated the scenario in the new testsuite and fixed the
> fix ;-)
>
Ah, the wonderful meta-loop of fix fixes.
> i think we should really setup a trac instance
On Nov 30, 12:54 am, Andrew Godwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The unit test 'suite' is hardly finished yet (one test...), but it does
> at least do a pretty thorough use check of some of the more basic
> scenarios. ./manage.py test denorm does indeed test and come out OK,
> though - it even
On Nov 30, 12:31 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Both of these changes look like they should work for your particular
> situation. They aren't a general solution to the problem -- although
> generalising to work correctly might not be too hard -- since you've
> changed the
