> I was merely offering my opinion. Playing > devil's advocate should[n't] be regarded as counter constructive.
But it is, playing devil's advocate is by definition a destructive position. There's nothing particularly wrong with that in general, but it's a little late in the class-based-views discussion to be starting. > If something is obviously not 100% ideal, > will obviously lead to problems in the near future, and doesn't need > to be done right away (view functions work fine), why do it? Because that's the only way things every get done. Nothing is ever 100% ideal or without consequences. It's advance or stagnate, and the consensus seems to be to advance. > Complaining about a passer by with > an opinion and suggesting that they "help" by writing code is much > like asking a guy who shouts, "Your back tire is flat." to fix your > tire or go away. Only they already know the tire is flat. They've already pulled over, taken out the spare and are in the process of replacing the flat tire. Someone shouting "Your back tire is flat" at this point isn't helpful. -- Michael <mhall...@gmail.com> On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 13:24 -0700, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > Gabriel > > You don't have to go to thesaurus.com with the intention of generating > a more formidable argument. I was merely offering my opinion. Playing > devil's advocate should be regarded as counter constructive. If I see > a man about to throw an egg at an otherwise clean wall, I don't need > to offer him an alternative weapon in order to tell him it's not a > good idea to throw eggs at clean walls. I take a more hueristic > approach to my suggestions. If something is obviously not 100% ideal, > will obviously lead to problems in the near future, and doesn't need > to be done right away (view functions work fine), why do it? Why not > wait until something that is obviously correct comes about? As the > wiki states, there are many implementations out there. With many more > something really right will come. Complaining about a passer by with > an opinion and suggesting that they "help" by writing code is much > like asking a guy who shouts, "Your back tire is flat." to fix your > tire or go away. Take advice or leave it. Don't complain when you get > it. > > > > On Oct 16, 1:34 am, Gabriel Hurley <gab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What do you call this. I don't see how any software developer could > > > consider constructive criticism as anything other than helping out. > > > > You've posted three messages in this thread, but none of them seem > > "constructive" to me. You've pointed out areas of disagreement and > > used inflammatory hyperbole, but not offered your alternatives or > > improvements. > > > > While I firmly stand by your right to disagree with this API and > > anything else you see fit (including this response), this API > > represents consensus. It is the result of months (maybe years) of > > work, hundreds of messages between tens of developers, dozens of > > discussions, numerous attempts at different implementations, and who > > knows how many man-hours spent on it... In fact, it may be the most > > thoroughly discussed feature I've seen in my time with Django. > > > > So the question stands, what would your implementation look like? How > > would it improve things and still avoid all the pitfalls that have > > been mentioned over the course of development? > > > > Respectfully, > > > > - Gabriel > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@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.
