On Friday, July 26, 2013 10:27:23 AM UTC-4, Ramiro Morales wrote:
> django.utils.unittest is a copy of the Python>= 2.7 stdlib unittest
> library
> (aka unittest2)
>
> Looking at the list of classes involved in your description seems to
> indicate
> you might want to report your findings to t
Is that from django-pyodbc or a very old version of django-mssql?
The recent versions of django-mssql use SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (...) to
avoid some of the issues with flipping the order multiple times. The
biggest issue is that order is not guaranteed without explicitly specifying
the order for
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Wim Lewis wrote:
>
> On 30 Jul 2013, at 2:06 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>> How do you think such support would look like? For negative indices you'd
>> have to know the size of the resultset to be able to do "limit somthing
>> offset length-your_negative_index"
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 13:01 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> 3) retrieve via DESC, apply LIMIT and then re-sort by ASC using derived table
...
> (3) would require two sorts on the data like this
>
> SELECT * FROM (rest-of-query ORDER BY ... DESC LIMIT n ) ORDER BY ... ASC
I haven't followed this threa
In your example "print qs[0]" evaluates a *clone* of "qs", not "qs" itself.
Therefore "qs[0]; qs[-1]; qs[0]" triggers 3 queries, just like "qs[0]; qs[0];
qs[0]" would.
Now, if you really evaluate your "qs", for example by doing "list(qs)", then
further slicing/indexing on "qs" would operate on
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Wim Lewis wrote:
>
> On 30 Jul 2013, at 2:06 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>> How do you think such support would look like? For negative indices you'd
>> have to know the size of the resultset to be able to do "limit somthing
>> offset length-your_negative_index
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Daniele Procida wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013, Andre Terra wrote:
>
> >As for the reasons for disallowing negative indexes, dcramer's comment in
> >the ticket makes it clear: there is no way to infer what the last item in
> a
> >query would be, except if you orde
On 31 July 2013 07:56, Florian Apolloner wrote:
> Hi Wim,
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 12:04:42 AM UTC+2, Wim Lewis wrote:
>>
>> On 30 Jul 2013, at 2:06 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>> > How do you think such support would look like? For negative indices
>> > you'd have to know the size of th
2013/7/25 Aymeric Augustin
I'd like to deprecate admindocs.
>
Given the feedback, I'll put this plan on hold for the time being. Thank
you.
--
Aymeric.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
Aymeric Augustin writes:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to deprecate admindocs. Here are my reasons:
>
> 1) It's called the "documentation generator", but it only operates on
> docstrings. This promotes the idea that docstrings are appropriate
> documentation, while the Python and Django communities now f
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013, Andre Terra wrote:
>As for the reasons for disallowing negative indexes, dcramer's comment in
>the ticket makes it clear: there is no way to infer what the last item in a
>query would be, except if you order it descendingly. For what is worth,
>production code should never r
11 matches
Mail list logo
