W liście Mike Orr z dnia piątek 23 listopada 2007: > On Nov 23, 2007 6:19 AM, Paweł Stradomski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I think the current solution (function being passed by the > > framework to routes) is better, as it gives more flexibility. Throwin an > > exception would force just a single way of informing the framework about > > redirects - and is a bad idea, as this propagating exception might cause > > strange behaviour, like rolling back database sessions. > > Hmm. Well, the match function is called in only one place by the > framework, so it would be easy to catch it close to the source. And > without an exception it would have to have two very different return > values: a match dict or a string destination.
But redirect_to might be called by the user. -- Paweł Stradomski --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
