Cool, will do. I guess the earliest release this could get into would be django 1.2?
Looking at http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/contributing/ , it seems to me like this would definitely be considered a non- trivial patch. Should I work up a more readable version of my initial proposal for discussion, or would you rather just have a patch and a bunch of tests? Are there any pre-existing benchmarks on the url resolution process? Looking in trunk/tests, I see http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/trunk/tests/regressiontests/urlpatterns_reverse which looks to mostly be correctness tests, not performance tests. > Any documentation suggestions are welcome, but django-dev isn't the > right place. Work up a patch, and attach it to the ticket. Will do. Cheers, Alex On Sep 20, 7:45 am, Russell Keith-Magee <freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:35 PM, vegas <alexander.fair...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Okay, so I've looked at the previous discussion on this topic, and the > > code. Firstly let me say a big thank you to everyone who has worked on > > Django, it's a fabulously useful piece of software, and a lot of fun > > to work with. > > > By my lights, changeset 8760 could be considered to induce a > > regression. I say this because if you look at the doctests on lines > > 87-92, it seems pretty clear that original author had args and kwargs > > playing together happily. Whether or not anyone other than this > > Killarny fellow, and myself give a rat's patoot is another story :D . > > Malcolm explains the state of play regarding the backwards > incompatibility from [8760] in the discussion around #8764. > Regardless, the changeset predates v1.0, so it isn't covered by our > v1.0 backwards compatibility guarantees. > > > I do feel that the docs talking about urlconfs > > could use a more direct approach. I'd add the following very > > forthright disclaimer > > tohttp://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/http/urls/#topics-http-urls > > Any documentation suggestions are welcome, but django-dev isn't the > right place. Work up a patch, and attach it to the ticket. > > > > > In terms of adding back args and kwargs playing together nicely in the > > Garden of UrlDen, it would seem to me to be accomplishable by doing > > the following(I'm referencing Django 1.1 line numbers here, if there's > > interest in a patch I will work one up against SVN): > ... > > If the community is interested in regaining the capacity to have args > > and kwargs in the same urlpattern I'd be happy to work up a patch > > following those outlines and run it through whatever tests are > > desired. > > I don't think you'd see any objection to a patch that allows for > mixing args and kwargs - if you can find a way that (1) works in the > general case, and (2) can be calculated quickly. Remember, URL > dispatch is the core of what Django does, so it can't be a slow > operation. > > I haven't done any sort of formal proof, but Malcolm is a smart guy, > and my gut reaction is that he is on the money - this is something > that simply isn't possible in the general case. If you want to prove > us wrong, code - and the mother of all test suites - is the way to do > it. > > Yours, > Russ Magee %-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
