On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:44 PM, vegas <alexander.fair...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Cool, will do. I guess the earliest release this could get into > would be django 1.2? > > Looking at http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/contributing/ > , it seems to me like this would definitely be considered a non- > trivial patch.
Yes - this would be considered a non-trivial patch. > Should I work up a more readable version of my initial proposal for > discussion, or would you rather just have a patch and a bunch of > tests? It's easy to propose a solution - it's a lot harder to actually make it work. In this case, code - and, in particular, tests - will be a lot more convincing than a text description of the approach. However, be prepared for the outcome that your code may be rejected and thrown away. In this case, the code is serving as a working implementation of your proposal, and we still haven't been convinced of your proposal. Just writing the code doesn't mean it will automatically get accepted. > Are there any pre-existing benchmarks on the url resolution process? > Looking in trunk/tests, I see > http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/trunk/tests/regressiontests/urlpatterns_reverse > which looks to mostly be correctness tests, not performance tests. You are correct that there aren't any performance tests. The performance test is not allowing O(2^n) algorithms into the URLresolver in the first place :-) Yours, Russ Magee %-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
