I completely agree. Even the middleware solution doesn't seem quite right as it will check each page/request. I've been thinking about this a lot and I wonder if maybe the only part that should be reusable is the models? I don't know. But since there is no way (that I know of) to use inheritance for apps, apps seem to be sort of limiting.
On Oct 21, 4:53 am, bruno desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 20 oct, 01:33, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 2:10 PM, bruno desthuilliers > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Indeed. But , OTHO, having to copy/paste a whole urls.py just to a add > > > a simple decorator on the view functions is not really DRY. > > > Personally, I don't agree; writing code to do what you want, even if > > it starts with copy/pasting someone else's code, isn't really > > "repetition". Far too often on this list, people confuse "DRY" with > > "never write any code at all". > > I don't think this last remark apply here. Of course, if what the OP > wanted was to customize the third-part app's urls on a per-url basis, > your answer would have been perfectly appropriate (and that's > certainly what I would have answered too). But the use case here is > somewhat different - it's about wrapping *all* the app's views with a > *same* decorator, without doing _any other change_ to the url's > patterns, args etc. I'm really surprised you don't see this as a > repetition... > > "I hereby retrograde you to grade 36" !-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" 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-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
