On 03/14/2014 09:50 AM, Michael Manfre wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]
> <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 
> 
> 
>         .get(or=None) (of some description) would be my preference, but
>         even that is ugly and confuses the existing API with "special"
>         keywords that aren't actually a filter.
> 
> 
>     I would be strong -1 on having a special keyword.
> 
> 
> Even if the special keyword is 'default'? .get(..., default=None) is a
> common python pattern that fits well with this usage.

Backwards-incompatible (and generally problematic) for any model with a
field named 'default'.

Adding special keyword arguments to functions that currently take
arbitrary filters as kwargs is basically a non-starter.

Carl

-- 
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5323260A.8090400%40oddbird.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to