On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:22 PM, anb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 3:08 pm, Chris Beaven <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Friday, January 21, 2011 12:35:58 PM UTC+13, Karen Tracey wrote: > > > > > Rather, a BooleanField that raises an error on an attempt to save an > > > instance that has no value set is what's being asked for. The quiet > always > > > defaulting to False does seem rather odd to me as well. > > > > The current behaviour still seems in-line with the behaviour a > non-nullable > > charfield (if not self.null, default to ''). > > So, for consistency should we also make a not-null charfield fail loudly > if > > instanciated without a value ? :P > > My argument for that is on the ticket. "It's ok for CharFields with > blank=True to default to the empty string, because that's semantically > the lack of a value for the field. However, True and False are equals; > False is not the lack of a value." Whoops, looks like I should have refreshed this thread before hitting send. :-) Tobias -- Tobias McNulty, Managing Partner Caktus Consulting Group, LLC http://www.caktusgroup.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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.
