Though the patch in the ticket does solve the problem I completely agree
with removing the code altogether… I'm not a fan of "helpfully"
reformulating exceptions while trying to be more specific. In practice it
hurts more than it helps, and this case is just another confirmation.
--
You receiv
On 30.09.2011, at 01:58, Luke Plant wrote:
> I wrote:
>
>> and in this case you would instead get
>> this message:
>>
>> "The rendered_content attribute was discarded when this
>> TemplateResponse class was pickled."
>>
>> which is completely false.
>
> ...which is completely false, so ple
Hi,
On Friday, September 30, 2011 2:22:12 AM UTC+2, Ramiro Morales wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Luke Plant wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > r16568 [1] added SimpleTemplateResponse.__getattr__ as part of a fix for
> > #16326 [2].
> >
> > There is one obvious bug in the implementation - it
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Luke Plant wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> r16568 [1] added SimpleTemplateResponse.__getattr__ as part of a fix for
> #16326 [2].
>
> There is one obvious bug in the implementation - it calls
> super(...).__getattr__ which itself raises AttributeError because none
> of the ba
I wrote:
> and in this case you would instead get
> this message:
>
> "The rendered_content attribute was discarded when this
>TemplateResponse class was pickled."
>
> which is completely false.
...which is completely false, so please ignore that part :-) The rest of
the email was sound t
Hi all,
r16568 [1] added SimpleTemplateResponse.__getattr__ as part of a fix for
#16326 [2].
There is one obvious bug in the implementation - it calls
super(...).__getattr__ which itself raises AttributeError because none
of the base classes have __getattr__. It should use getattr instead.
That
