On Nov 18, 4:40 pm, Nathaniel Whiteinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Out of curiosity, for those who want RequestContext added to
> render_to_response, is there a reason you don't like using
> direct_to_template instead?
Holy smokes, that thought never crossed my mind, despite using both
the dire
I understand about the loose coupling, but I think there is some
misunderstanding about the very nature of 'loosely coupled'. Coupling
has to do with *dependency*, not just utility. Adding a decoupled
method to the request is not a restrictive assumption, it is what it
is - a shortcut. No-one is '
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Yuri Baburov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:19 AM, zvoase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ...
>>> # Using RequestContext
>>> def myview(request, *args):
>>>#
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:19 AM, zvoase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
>> # Using RequestContext
>> def myview(request, *args):
>># some code here...
>>request.render('template_name.html', {...})
> ...
>>
>> Tha
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, I added my votes here:
> https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pIaJn09D1vqW1yJjl3wGUeg
> (not sure if you're counting non-committer votes or not)
You're -1 on SessionWizard is partially invalid. I tried to
anticipate the n
Apologies to JKM if you got this already . . . I thought I emailed you
directly, but I can't find it in my sent mail folder.
What happened to "integrate databrowse into admin" and a few other
features? They were on the 1.1 list right before you re-organized it,
so I didn't know if they were unint
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 6:19 AM, zvoase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> # Using RequestContext
> def myview(request, *args):
># some code here...
>request.render('template_name.html', {...})
...
>
> That just seems logical to me. Rather than (potentially) break
> backwards compatibility,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Nathaniel Whiteinge
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Out of curiosity, for those who want RequestContext added to
> render_to_response, is there a reason you don't like using
> direct_to_template instead? I see the two as being functionally
> equivalent (minus the ad
I have an idea which may solve the issue of render_to_response using a
RequestContext.
Why not have render_to_response as a shortcut in django.shortcuts (as
it is now), and then add a 'render' method to the request instance
which would do render_to_response but with a RequestContext instead.
That
Nathaniel Whiteinge wrote:
> Yes. It's built into Django and already does exactly what some people
> want render_to_response to do, so why all the hullabaloo? (Or am I
> still missing something?)
The problem here is for novice users. We have two things doing roughly
the same thing which is confu
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Nathaniel Whiteinge
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 18, 5:43 pm, Ludvig Ericson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Isn't that a generic view?
>
> Yes. It's built into Django and already does exactly what some people
> want render_to_response to do, so why all the
On Nov 18, 5:43 pm, Ludvig Ericson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Isn't that a generic view?
Yes. It's built into Django and already does exactly what some people
want render_to_response to do, so why all the hullabaloo? (Or am I
still missing something?)
--~--~-~--~~~--
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Ludvig Ericson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And that's very doable, and I'm with you on this. I hate having to
> pass context_instance. Long lines.
Although nothing stops someone from writing their own wrapper if they
don't like direct_to_template for some reason
> Then why not just change the docs/tutorial to use or mention
> direct_to_template instead?
>
> Granted, there is a bit of momentum behind render_to_response, but if
> the docs are changed it will just be the status quo until that time
> people start catching on to the simpler method.
Isn't that
Thanks for your explanation, David.
On Nov 18, 4:04 pm, "David Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's no reason to cause confusion when someone uses
> render_to_response, following tutorial code or something else, and
> wonder why things aren't working the way they expect it to work.
Then wh
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Nathaniel Whiteinge
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>my Python-foo is not strong, is there a reason I should
> avoid using direct_to_template in 99% of my views?
I think if people are already using RequestContext 99% of the time,
then render_to_response should include
Out of curiosity, for those who want RequestContext added to
render_to_response, is there a reason you don't like using
direct_to_template instead? I see the two as being functionally
equivalent (minus the addition of RequestContext, of course), but this
debate crops up every so often -- is there
Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> Yuri, to answer your question: I try never to send the request object
> into a template context
Uhm... But using RequestContext is not about it. Everyone I know uses
RequestContext almost exclusively (i.e. nobody uses standard
render_to_response with plain Context insta
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:42 AM, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM, Yuri Baburov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm always wondeing how it's possible that Django creators don't use
>> django in ways that are written in django documentation. That leads to
>
For all three of our projects in django, we've gone through and used our own
exended version of render_to_response, which uses RequestContext by default.
Its such a blessing.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:42 PM, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM, Yuri Baburo
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM, Yuri Baburov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm always wondeing how it's possible that Django creators don't use
> django in ways that are written in django documentation. That leads to
> misunderstanding in expectations, and should explain why some tickets
> don't
Hi Adrian,
> * View-02 (Add RequestContext to render_to_response() by default): A
> ticket or mailing-list discussion wasn't linked-to on this one, so I'm
> going purely on the name of the change -- but I really don't like it.
> I rarely use RequestContext; I'd even feel comfortable saying I
> di
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've also reviewed most of the features on the list. I'll talk about the
> review process -- and how y'all can contribute -- below, but if you just wanna
> see my thoughts, they're here:
> http://spreadsheets.google.co
I volunteer for #17!
And I have working code for a pretty simplistic message handler which
is session vs database based (which is one of the proposals, sort of).
So I guess if that's whats wanted, I can mold it to fit what has been
discussed.
On Nov 13, 5:03 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTE
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to ask committers and anyone else to send me their own rankings.
Also: There's no real need for everyone to score everything. In fact,
that'll probably be information overload.
If you want to work on one of
Just a note about Auth-01, the particular solution I posted is only
the first and fastest method I could think to implement the feature of
being able to set permissions for the anon user. I care less about the
implementation details then I do about the feature.
Dj Gilcrease
OpenRPG Developer
~~h
Hi folks --
I've reorganized the 1.1 feature list
(http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Version1.1Features) and added "short
codes" so we can have a quick shorthand as we review features.
I've also reviewed most of the features on the list. I'll talk about the
review process -- and how y'all can c
27 matches
Mail list logo
