On 13 kwi 2013, at 23:48, Brantley Harris <deadwis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It would be extremely easy to implement
Such a statement suggests that the you didn't really think the problem through.
Few things are "extremely easy to implement", especially in a framework with
years of legacy projects in the wild.
> and would lead to vastly better code across new projects, including a simpler
> way of writing rest style interfaces:
>
> url('^objects/$', 'views.create_object', methods=['post', 'put'],
> name='create_object'),
> url('^objects/$', 'views.get_objects', name='list_objects'),
How would you implement a reverse() variant having this functionality in?
Does get_objects respond to DELETE as well?
If create_objects raises Http404, do we continue traversing the urlconf? What
about reverse() in that case?
> I will gladly implement the code required for this, but don't wish to do so
> if it's going to be quashed, which is why I bring it up here.
Often you can find tricky edge cases and other obstacles only through an
implementation effort. Realistically, no-one will agree to merge a
functionality based only on a vague mailing list post. Working code wins
arguments, as they say. Alternatively, a careful up-front design document (this
is what the core Python team does with PEPs).
--
Best regards,
Łukasz Langa
WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/
Twitter: @llanga
IRC: ambv on #python-dev
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
