On Nov 23, 2007 6:19 AM, Paweł Stradomski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I think the current solution (function being passed by the framework to > routes) is better, as it gives more flexibility. Throwin an exception would > force just a single way of informing the framework about redirects - and is a > bad idea, as this propagating exception might cause strange behaviour, like > rolling back database sessions.
Hmm. Well, the match function is called in only one place by the framework, so it would be easy to catch it close to the source. And without an exception it would have to have two very different return values: a match dict or a string destination. -- Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
