On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Tai Lee wrote:
> On May 3, 9:43 am, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> This stems back to the design motivation of Django's template language
>> -- you shouldn't be doing math in the template. Instead, you should be
>> doing your math in the view, and providing the t
On May 3, 9:43 am, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> This stems back to the design motivation of Django's template language
> -- you shouldn't be doing math in the template. Instead, you should be
> doing your math in the view, and providing the template with a
> pre-calculated result.
>
> So, my incli
> Holy god, not to be rude, but given that this is completely unreadable I'm
> even more -1 than I ever would have been on the basis of the principle of a
> dumber template language.
>
> Alex
My apologies. All that is doing is rendering the following result when
the URL is http://localhost:8001/?x
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Phui Hock wrote:
> On May 3, 7:43 am, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
> > This stems back to the design motivation of Django's template language
> > -- you shouldn't be doing math in the template. Instead, you should be
> > doing your math in the view, and providing
On May 3, 7:43 am, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> This stems back to the design motivation of Django's template language
> -- you shouldn't be doing math in the template. Instead, you should be
> doing your math in the view, and providing the template with a
> pre-calculated result.
>
> So, my incli
Hi,
This is the first weekly status update of many to come. Just a quick
overview of this project and myself.
My nickname on freenode is 'mitsuhiko' and this is the preferred form
to reach me in general. Alternatively my twitter account with the same
name is a good way of reaching me even when I'
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Jonathan Slenders
wrote:
> Hey, this pattern are nested decorators in templates.
>
> Most people here are probably against having nested template tags with
> the same name. I think it does only make sense when there's somehow a
> distinction between a
> "placeholde
Thanks for this; I'll check out your "decorate" tag.
On Apr 29, 6:48 pm, Jonathan Slenders
wrote:
> Hey, this pattern are nested decorators in templates.
>
> Most people here are probably against having nested template tags with
> the same name. I think it does only make sense when there's someho
Yes, I'm using something similar to that now; it works, but it's not
as elegant as I'd like.
On Apr 29, 10:19 am, legutierr wrote:
> Hi amagee-
>
> Have you tried this?
>
> base_a.html
> first {% block content %}{% block subcontent %}{% endblock %}{%
> endblock%} last
>
> base_b.html
> {% extends
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Phui Hock wrote:
> Hi,
> It always frustrates me when I must resort to custom filter to do
> simple math to achieve some special-case markups (eg. applying a row
> tag around 5 items max for a list of objects).
>
> Do you think a math tag like this that I just publi
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> On 05/02/2011 07:15 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
what do you think about deprecating AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE and .get_profile()
or removing the suggestion to use it from the docs in 1.4 release?
There are broader issues with extendi
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Shawn Milochik wrote:
> Since it wasn't stated explicitly in that last wish-list, I'd like to add:
> No assumption that the primary key is an integer.
Certainly worth stating, but I don't think it's a major technical
challenge. An abstract base class approach shoul
Hi,
It always frustrates me when I must resort to custom filter to do
simple math to achieve some special-case markups (eg. applying a row
tag around 5 items max for a list of objects).
Do you think a math tag like this that I just published to
djangosnippets.org can be made into the default list
On 02.05.2011, at 19:22, Carl Meyer wrote:
> On 05/02/2011 11:38 AM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
>> Given a blank slate, what would Auth look like these days? And can we
>> work towards that?
>
> Now, why you gotta get all constructive and forward-thinking and stuff? ;-)
>
> Here's my list of core ide
Since it wasn't stated explicitly in that last wish-list, I'd like to
add: No assumption that the primary key is an integer.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django
developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroup
On 05/02/2011 11:38 AM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> Given a blank slate, what would Auth look like these days? And can we
> work towards that?
Now, why you gotta get all constructive and forward-thinking and stuff? ;-)
Here's my list of core ideal-contrib.auth desiderata that I keep seeing
crop up in
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Carl Meyer wrote:
...
> I don't mind leaving get_profile() around, I guess, but IMO the best
> argument that can be made for that is "it's useless but mostly harmless,
> and it's not worth making people change their code to remove it." I'll
> continue to recommend i
On 05/02/2011 07:15 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>> what do you think about deprecating AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE and .get_profile()
>>> or removing the suggestion to use it from the docs in 1.4 release?
>>> There are broader issues with extending User model but I think this one
>>> can be handled sep
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Karen Tracey wrote:
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Mikhail Korobov
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>> what do you think about deprecating AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE and .get_profile()
>> or removing the suggestion to use it from the docs in 1.4 release?
>> There are broader
19 matches
Mail list logo
