On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Florian Apolloner <f.apollo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday, November 10, 2011 10:43:01 AM UTC+1, Tom Evans wrote: >> >> Please no - an optional argument is all well and good, until people >> >> I don't get why it is difficult to extract what you want from the >> >> request, place it in a context and render it. > > I think you missunderstood me, I didn't ment to add a optional keyword > argument like request, but pass **kwargs down the chain -- The current > template loaders would just ignore it completly but users might override it > to supply extra data to their template loader. Either way it was just a > suggestion and I am not really sold on it either… > > Cheers, > Florian
I tend to lurch from one extreme to another - I've calmed down a little now! I worry about coupling things to the request, having used frameworks where that has happened over time. It always leads to problems down the line, as in my experience, a lot of what happens on a web site happens outside of the request/response cycle. It's already pretty hard to generate the same content outside of a request/response if your template expects things from TEMPLATE_CONTEXT_PROCESSORS. Cheers Tom -- 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.
