On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 5:48:09 PM UTC+1, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > While pour point is technically valid as far as request.GET and > request.POST are concerned, in practice they're so commonly used as a > metonymy for HTTP GET and HTTP POST that it's worth having a strong stance > on keeping them separate. >
I'm not entirely serious, but perhaps we should provide better names for `request.GET` and `request.POST` at the same time (with compat). One contains some parameters from the request URL (but can be provided on any HTTP verb, not just GET), the other contains data from the request entity, providing it comes in one of two convenient formats that have common usage (and can be provided on various HTTP verbs, not constrained to POST). The current names are misleading if you try to learn HTTP by learning Django (and I'm guessing a lot of people do). Certainly the ?next / next= case pointed out above by Marc (a pattern I use a fair amount) would read more precisely (in the absence of `request.REQUEST`, which is a clunky, blurry, quite possibly misguiding but technically no worse named convenience). I'm +1 on deprecating `request.REQUEST`, and maybe +0 on the rest of what I've just said ;-) J -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9cc2400e-6a67-49cd-b5ea-6a03f4618482%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
