Re: get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 01:37 +, Dave Jeffery wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Malcolm Tredinnick > wrote: > > > There's no reason to mark it deprecated. It still works fine > for what it > does. It just doesn't do what the name suggests, but,

Re: get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Dave Jeffery
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:11 AM, Malcolm Tredinnick < malc...@pointy-stick.com> wrote: > > There's no reason to mark it deprecated. It still works fine for what it > does. It just doesn't do what the name suggests, but, historically, that > hasn't been a real show-stopper for understanding purpose

Re: get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 14:20 -0800, Dave Jeffery wrote: > I should have explained more clearly, get_absolute_url() would still > be available in 1.1 (this is required for backwards compatibility > anyway). > get_url() and get_url_path() would simply be the preffered way to do > it, I would expect t

Re: get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Dave Jeffery
I should have explained more clearly, get_absolute_url() would still be available in 1.1 (this is required for backwards compatibility anyway). get_url() and get_url_path() would simply be the preffered way to do it, I would expect that get_absolute_url() would remain in django (albeit deprecated)

Re: #7210 - F() syntax, design feedback required.

2009-01-09 Thread Ian Kelly
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > Well the idea is to do that for all DB engines(since it's the only portable > option), so while Oracle may optimize it correctly I very much doubt MySQL > does :) . Is the multiple-set portable to other dbs(in any event I think it > would come

Re: #7210 - F() syntax, design feedback required.

2009-01-09 Thread Alex Gaynor
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Alex Gaynor > wrote: > >> The actual implementation issue arrise with the usage of F() for related > >> fields in update queries. Specifically one of my con

Re: #7210 - F() syntax, design feedback required.

2009-01-09 Thread Ian Kelly
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: >> The actual implementation issue arrise with the usage of F() for related >> fields in update queries. Specifically one of my concerns was the >> portability of the SQL. I spoke with Michael

Re: #7210 - F() syntax, design feedback required.

2009-01-09 Thread Ian Kelly
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > The actual implementation issue arrise with the usage of F() for related > fields in update queries. Specifically one of my concerns was the > portability of the SQL. I spoke with Michael Trier this afternoon and it > appears to me that the S

Re: get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Ludvig Ericson
On Jan 9, 2009, at 20:26, Dave Jeffery wrote: > > Back in August of last year, there was a discussion about the > confusing name of get_absolute_url and it led to this doument by Simon > Willison: > http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/ReplacingGetAbsoluteUrl > > After looking through the version 1.

get_url() and get_url_path() for 1.1?

2009-01-09 Thread Dave Jeffery
Back in August of last year, there was a discussion about the confusing name of get_absolute_url and it led to this doument by Simon Willison: http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/ReplacingGetAbsoluteUrl After looking through the version 1.1 feature list (and rejected features)[1], this seems to ha