> On 10 August 2012 18:56, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> I think Option 2 is better, for the reasons you state.
+1. And it's not too entangled to be easily stripped out if/when Python 2 support is removed. On 11 August 2012 06:10, Łukasz Rekucki <lreku...@gmail.com> wrote: > How about wrapping those 3 lines of code into a class decorator > (preferably named more explicit then StrAndUnicode) ? That would be at > least a little DRY. +1. It won't mess with the inheritance hierarchy, and is explicit enough (depending on the name), whilst encapsulating the boilerplate elegantly. @python2_unicode_compatible? (Though, @-syntax class decorators are only available from 2.6+, but I'm guessing we won't be able to drop 2.5 support at the same time as picking up 3. I guess we could just tidy up when we do.) Simon -- 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.
