> The purpose of this project is to define (and then implement) a DSL
> for serialization.
If a DSL is what you are looking for, then I withdraw my proposal.
The idea of hosting yet another DSL inside Django project scares me a
little.
I'll just implement my idea as a separate project, I guess.
> So - show me what it would look like. Show me how I, as a third party,
> would use your proposed syntax to define output that would match
> Django's existing serialization scheme. Yes, this serialization format
> will exist as a built in default; but I should be able to reproduce
> that format in
ts to make Django able to do that in all
seriousness, through GSoC or not.
On Apr 5, 6:44 pm, DaNmarner wrote:
> > 1) It's almost illegible. Between your mail client's munging of line
> > wrapping, and the completely unreadable code samples, it's very
> > difficul
> 1) It's almost illegible. Between your mail client's munging of line
> wrapping, and the completely unreadable code samples, it's very
> difficult to tell if you have presented a good idea.
Pardon the format. I actually auto-wrapped the text with vim and copy
pasted at the first time. Realizing
tSerializedModel()
)
}
data = serializer.serialize('xml', Choice.objects.all(),
SerializedChoice())
data would contain something similar to what the current XMLSerializer
yields except:
1. No votes number.
2. The tag for poll now contains a sublevel tag that has a
serialize
))
data would contain something similar to what the current XMLSerializer
yields
except:
1. No votes number.
2. The tag for poll now contains a sublevel tag that has a
serialized poll
object in it.
3. The text of the choise is in lowercase.
And that roughly covers the API design
First of all: my native language is not English, so I apologize for
any potential natural language error (or any error at all) below.
After (briefly) reading through the current implementaion as well as
the "Issues to consider" section in the GSoC2011 page on wiki, my
initial observation is that t
What would the ListField Look like?
On Jul 16, 8:06 pm, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> The last while has been spent continuing the fight to make aggregates
> work correctly, Russ provided some good insight that's gotten me
> farther on it. All that code is in my query-refactor-aggregates
> b
