Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> I'm a strong -1 on having generic-view-specific permalink functions
> and template tags like this. This solution goes after the symptoms
> rather than the fundamental problem, which is that the current reverse
> URL implementation cannot handle multiple URL patterns for the same
> view.
Right. I think we agree that naming of patterns is a good thing anyway
(read my reply to Malcolm further down the thread).
But talking about "urls for objects" I think it's useful as a separate
feature. Just yesterday I've implemented (in a local project) a tag that
actually works as a replacement for "get_absolute_url" only. I looks
like this:
{% object_url some_object %}
It searchs through url patterns for "object_detail" views solely and
exits on condition of isinstance(some_object, queryset.model). However
it doesn't work for non-generic views it looks to me so much nicer than:
{% url "object_view" some_object.id %}
So I couldn't resist to share it :-). What do you think?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
