On Fri, 23 May 2008 17:20:43 +0800
"Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm currently sitting in an airport, so I won't have a chance to have
> a good look until tomorrow at the earliest. However, here's some
> immediate feedback. Most of them are in the category of "this probably
> w
> I'm testing on SQLite, and I don't get that failure when running on
> vanilla trunk.
I am sorry. You was right, but I have fixed it.
> > > I just updated to your latest patch and there appears to be 2 test
> > > failures:http://dpaste.com/52137/, the first one appears to be
> > > caused by the
I'm testing on SQLite, and I don't get that failure when running on
vanilla trunk.
On May 22, 6:57 pm, Sebastian Noack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2008 14:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
>
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I just updated to your latest patch and there appears
On Thu, 22 May 2008 14:20:26 -0700 (PDT)
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just updated to your latest patch and there appears to be 2 test
> failures: http://dpaste.com/52137/ , the first one appears to be
> caused by the fact that different database engines do the rounding
> dif
I just updated to your latest patch and there appears to be 2 test
failures: http://dpaste.com/52137/ , the first one appears to be
caused by the fact that different database engines do the rounding
differently, my suggestion would be to change to something that
divides evenly for the integer valu
On Wed, 21 May 2008 21:12:05 +0800
"Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do I think? The code doesn't look fundamentally bad, but I'm not
> going to take a serious look until there are some test cases.
>
> Consider this from my point of view. I need to validate that your code
> w
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 2:27 AM, Sebastian Noack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have released a new patch. See
> http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/7210/0001-Added-expression-support-for-QuerySet.update.3.patch.
>
> I still have to write tests and documentation, but I would like to he
I have released a new patch. See
http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/7210/0001-Added-expression-support-for-QuerySet.update.3.patch.
What I have done since the last version of this patch:
(1) Added F object support to filter and exclude.
(2) Implemented __radd__, __rsub__, __rmul__,
Tonight I will spend some time and write up a few test cases.
On May 10, 10:26 am, Sebastian Noack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I already implemented it as discussed with Russell. See the ticket. But
> thanks for the tip with the __radd__. I didn't knew __radd__, but I
> will still implement it.
I already implemented it as discussed with Russell. See the ticket. But
thanks for the tip with the __radd__. I didn't knew __radd__, but I
will still implement it.
Btw, I still have to implement the Expression stuff into
Query.add_filter to support filter() and exclude(), as proposed by
Russel an
Doh, Sean got there before me, __radd__ (and the other operations)
handle the reverse situation: http://dpaste.com/49224/ - example.
Looks like very cool stuff. I would recommend writing tests first,
based on what should happen(not necessarily what does), and then
continue with the code however.
On 10 May 2008, at 14:47, Sebastian Noack wrote:
> You can still do model.objects.update(foo=42) with my patch, because
> of 42 is casted to a LiteralExpr under the hood. I could even make it
> possible to do model.objects.update(foo=CurrentExpr() + 42). But there
> is no way to enable model.obje
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Sebastian Noack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:36:14 +0800
> "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * I don't see why LiteralExpr is required. Surely a literal should
>> continue to work as is; if a literal is involved in an expres
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:36:14 +0800
"Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The basic idea that you are proposing has been made before - for
> example, several of the discussions about adding aggregations to the
> ORM have included a capability similar to the one you propose.
> However, t
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Sebastian Noack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think QuerySet.update works to inflexible. In SQL you can define
> expressions containing the current value or the value of an other
> column in the update clause, for Example to incrementing a value in the
> r
Hi,
I think QuerySet.update works to inflexible. In SQL you can define
expressions containing the current value or the value of an other
column in the update clause, for Example to incrementing a value in the
result set. This is not possible by the ORM at the moment.
I developed a possible soluti
16 matches
Mail list logo
