The pull request has been rebased.
Thanks,
Michael Manfre
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 21 janv. 2014, at 19:05, Michael Manfre wrote:
> > The overall feedback I've gotten from my pull
Hi Michael,
On 21 janv. 2014, at 19:05, Michael Manfre wrote:
> The overall feedback I've gotten from my pull request seems positive. I'll
> rebase it against master and submit it for merging.
Let me know when you do this. I'll push the merge button before the patch gets
Just to make things clear, my reservations about the use of 'with' syntax with
cursors do not amount to an objection to this PR. I have not reviewed it again
since the rebase, but I did like most of what I've seen before. The with-
blocks can be cleaned up later, if I or anyone else find it
I agree with Aymeric in that cursors are very much like files. Wrapping a
single line of code in a with (or a try-finally) is a standard pattern and
allows Django to follow PEP 249 without extra modifications.
The overall feedback I've gotten from my pull request seems positive. I'll
rebase it
On Sunday 19 January 2014 10:44:32 Michael Manfre wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Shai Berger wrote:
> > Still, spreading with-blocks all over the code for this looks very ugly to
> > me.
> > I'd rather add an execute_single() or execute_and_close() method to the
> >
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> Still, spreading with-blocks all over the code for this looks very ugly to
> me.
> I'd rather add an execute_single() or execute_and_close() method to the
> cursors instead. Perhaps even only as private API, as that usage
On Sunday 19 January 2014 11:52:40 Łukasz Rekucki wrote:
> On 19 January 2014 09:12, Shai Berger wrote:
> > On Friday 17 January 2014 01:19:29 Michael Manfre wrote:
> >> In an effort to make Django a bit more explicit with regards to closing
> >> cursors when they are no longer
On 19 January 2014 09:12, Shai Berger wrote:
> On Friday 17 January 2014 01:19:29 Michael Manfre wrote:
>> In an effort to make Django a bit more explicit with regards to closing
>> cursors when they are no longer needed, I have created ticket #21751 [1]
>> with a pull
On 19 janv. 2014, at 09:12, Shai Berger wrote:
> I think this is suboptimal, API-wise. Python destroys temporaries soon
> enough.
> Is there a reason why we cannot arrange for a __del__ method to close the
> cursor? Circular references anywhere?
Hi Shai,
You probably
On Friday 17 January 2014 01:19:29 Michael Manfre wrote:
> In an effort to make Django a bit more explicit with regards to closing
> cursors when they are no longer needed, I have created ticket #21751 [1]
> with a pull request[2].
>
> Most of the changes are straight forward and change the usage
In an effort to make Django a bit more explicit with regards to closing
cursors when they are no longer needed, I have created ticket #21751 [1]
with a pull request[2].
Most of the changes are straight forward and change the usage of a cursor
so that it uses a context manager or closes the cursor
11 matches
Mail list logo