I think it's perfectly sane to document the filter + get_or_create combo,
feel free to open a ticket and pull request
On 20 February 2018 at 20:26, 'Mike Lissner' via Django developers
(Contributions to Django itself) <django-developers@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> This is my first message here, and sure enough I'm necromancing this
> thread from 2016!
>
> Below there's a message about how to use Q objects with get_or_create by
> chaining them. This works! But it's not documented. Is it crazy to document
> this?
>
> I think I used the advice in this thread a while back to write some code,
> but when I came upon the code today, it baffled me. I went to the docs, but
> there was no mention of this technique there, and so, here I am again at
> this thread.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 12:27:30 PM UTC-7, Flavio Curella wrote:
>>
>> It didn't occur to me that it could be done that way. Thanks!
>>
>> I'm closing the ticket as 'invalid'
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 2:03:02 PM UTC-5, charettes wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>
>>> Is there a reason we can't document chaining filter() with these methods
>>> when
>>> querying with Q() objects?
>>>
>>> Person.objects.filter(
>>> Q(first_name='George') | Q(first_name='Bruce')
>>> ).get_or_create(defaults={'last_name': 'Harrison'})
>>>
>>> If `defaults` was stil only passable as a kwarg this could have worked
>>> but at
>>> this point I don't think it's worth the additionnal complexity as
>>> there's no way
>>> to introduce a fully backward compatible API without deprecating passing
>>> `defaults` as the first arg.
>>>
>>> Even if we were to agree on a new unlikely used kwarg name to specify
>>> the query
>>> object the `(get|update)_or_create` APIs would end up disgressing from
>>> the `filter()`
>>> and `get()` ones which is the main objective of this proposed change I
>>> beleive.
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> Le mardi 16 août 2016 13:57:25 UTC-4, Flavio Curella a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I'm thinking about adding support for `Q` to `get_or_create` and
>>>> `update_or_create`. I've summarized my thoughts at
>>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27070.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a couple of unsolved question; the most critical is the one Tim
>>>> raises: if we were to add another keyword argument to those methods, how
>>>> much of an impact will it have? Can we find a name that we can be
>>>> reasonably confident is not used as a model field by anybody (or a _very_
>>>> small number of users)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> –Flavio.
>>>>
>>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/django-developers/6c1285c8-94da-49bc-bbbf-
> c76b8e6cfb3e%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/6c1285c8-94da-49bc-bbbf-c76b8e6cfb3e%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Adam
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMyDDM2SjuQX3E828znmVaBMFjjP7whBk24qtwpAD29scsuDcA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
