> values() and values_list() are both intended as optimisations for a 
> specific use case - retrieval of subsets of data without the overhead of 
> creating a model instance. This metaphor completely falls apart when 
> dealing with m2m relations, because the the "one row, one object" metaphor 
> that underpins most of the ORM falls apart. 
>
> I agree with you on this. "one-row,one-object" cannot be implemented here.
 

> While we could search for a deeper meaning for queries of this type, and 
> restructure the internal SQL to account for this, there's another issue to 
> consider. We're also talking about a part of the query API that has existed 
> since at least the query set refactor, and possibly as far back as magic 
> removal. That means there's between 5 and 7 years of legacy here, in which 
> time nobody else has raised a ticket about this issue. It's also reasonable 
> to assume that there will be a non-trivial number of people depending on 
> the API as currently implemented. 
>
> So, I'm inclined to say this is a known wart in the ORM, born of the leaky 
> abstraction of pushing relational data into an object-based representation. 
> Document the limitation, and move on.
>  
>

-- 
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/da7a89f3-25c8-4503-a443-e77c6b609d09%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to