On 12/1/05, Brant Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alright, I'll get up a ticket as soon as I can.
>
As promised:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/980
It explains not only the system but my reasoning.
I think the arguing about the color of the bikeshed thought is
mis-placed here. I'm not offering feedback, i.e. arguing that the
bikeshed is painted the wrong color, I'm offering an idea, a patch,
real code. But, I obviously didn't present my idea well enough, so I
will present it in wiki form
Hey Brent --
Thanks for your feedback.
However, as I see it, arguing about the syntax that an ORM should use
is just a rehashing of the argument over what color to paint the
bikeshed (http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/16.19.shtml). The
fact is that there's a serious mismatch between
Yes, it is a little ugly. I would suggest that you put the Q arguments
outside of your query for readability (also for those 'subqueries' you
were talking about):
hello = Q(headline__startswith='Hello')
bye = Q(headline__startswith='Goodbye')
articles.get_list(complex=(hello | goodbye))
As
Brant Harris wrote:
>
> SQL:
> SELECT * FROM `documents` WHERE ((something > 2 AND other < 4 AND
> other LIKE 'hi%') OR (something < 4))
>
> I've coded this out completely, so it's not a pipe-dream. If there is
> more interest I can provide such code.
>
It'd be interesting to look at. I for
I've read it. I think the author is under false impression that ORM is
supposed to provide better/simpler alternative to SQL. It is not the goal of
ORM. ORM is about bridging SQL with systems written in conventional computer
languages. Usually it is assumed that the system is OO-based, hence O
Jonathan Ellis left a pretty brutal attack about Django's ORM on his
blog today that I picked up from Planet Python, and I got to thinking
about it. I don't quite agree with him on many of his points. But I
did agree that the OR syntax, as it stands, is rather ugly.
So I was trying to think of
