I'll drop it. Someone else can chime in if they want. Just to be clear, the
work you all do on Django is much appreciated :)
Thanks,
Dave
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:53:41 PM UTC-5 James Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 4:09 PM Dave Gaeddert wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I ho
; Manager, "
> "or QuerySet, not '%s'." % klass__name
> )
> try:
> return queryset.get(*args, **kwargs)
> except queryset.model.DoesNotExist:
> return None
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 10:13 PM Dave Gaedder
Fair enough. To me, the `get_or_none` behavior with multiple results would
still be to raise an exception (so it is just like `get` in that sense).
And that’s the reason I personally don’t just see it as a shortcut for
`filter().first()` — I have (as I’m sure others have) made the mistake
befor
Hey Mariusz, thanks for the link — I found some other threads but not that
one. Would you mind saying why you're personally against it (`get_or_none`
specifically)?
At least how I read that thread, there was more debate about how to add it
than whether to add it at all, and then Cal sort of "ga
years... seems like this could be reconsidered.
On Tuesday, June 28, 2022 at 9:27:52 AM UTC-5 Dave Gaeddert wrote:
> > To begin with - thats the place I dont like .get() at all. The fact that
> > it might end up with multiple objects is a nuisance, but we cannot do
> > much
> To begin with - thats the place I dont like .get() at all. The fact that
> it might end up with multiple objects is a nuisance, but we cannot do
> much about it for API compat reasons
> ...
For what it's worth, I agree with what you're saying here too. Having a
`unique_or_none` (and maybe `uniq
I'll lob in my 2 cents that I actually think `get_or_none` would be great
to have, in the same way that I imagine people think `get_or_create` is
useful. You can try/catch yourself in both cases (example is basically the
exact same
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.0/ref/models/querysets/#get
