#33724: Changing from list to set in `exclude` raises errors, and is not
documented.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: אורי | Owner: nobody
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Database layer | Version: 4.1
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Release blocker | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by אורי):
Replying to [comment:6 Claude Paroz]:
> Still I wonder if the performance gain is worth the loss of consistency.
I wouldn't mind if exclude was defined to always be a set, but having to
code defensively by expecting list or set is a loss in my point of view.
I think logically it should be a set, because we don't need the same value
twice and the order doesn't matter. But we should decide how to handle old
code where it was a list. Maybe define it a set from now on, and write in
the documentation that it must be a set. But I don't see any problem with
including the following 4 lines every time we use `exclude`:
{{{
if exclude is None:
exclude = set()
else:
exclude = set(exclude)
}}}
By the way, since these 4 lines are repeated, maybe we can define a util
function that takes `exclude` as an argument, and return a set. Either
`set()` (if `exclude is None`) or `set(exclude)` otherwise.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/33724#comment:7>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/01070180df952f0b-10bb946d-b9ba-4944-8cb5-d746beb23020-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
