I dont understand that changes. For me thats just odd, and a royal pain to update lots of sites just for renaming clean_data to cleaned_data.
I really think thats odd and a better rationale would take in consideration that already working and defined functions should try to keep at least some kind of backward compatible hooks at least for being nice to users of clean_data! Why not incorporating the semantics or desired logic of cleaned_data into clean_data, so that at least that part of the newforms api would stay as in the documentation ? Etienne On Tue, 15 May 2007 02:30:14 +1000 Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 10:52 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > On 5/14/07, John Shaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For me, an AttributeError from clean_data is a much more friendly > > > change than silently ignoring code like: > > > > > > def clean_email(self): > > > """Prevent account hijacking by disallowing duplicate emails.""" > > > > John makes an excellent point. I'm +1 on changing clean_data to > > cleaned_data and keeping the "clean_XXX" method hooks as-is. > > Everything switched around again in [5237]. > > Malcolm > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
