Re: HttpRequest.read(), HttpRequest.body, HttpRequest.raw_post_data

2012-02-23 Thread Carl Meyer
On 02/23/2012 09:40 AM, Tom Christie wrote: >> a design decision was made long ago that HttpRequest objects should > provide a file-like interface (thus also .readline(), .readlines(), and > .xreadlines()) > > Wouldn't having .read() .readline(), .readlines(), and .xreadlines() all > on

Re: HttpRequest.read(), HttpRequest.body, HttpRequest.raw_post_data

2012-02-23 Thread Tom Christie
> a design decision was made long ago that HttpRequest objects should provide a file-like interface (thus also .readline(), .readlines(), and .xreadlines()) Wouldn't having .read() .readline(), .readlines(), and .xreadlines() all on `request.body` provide a slightly cleaner interface, whilst

Re: HttpRequest.read(), HttpRequest.body, HttpRequest.raw_post_data

2012-02-23 Thread Carl Meyer
Hi Tom, On 02/23/2012 06:07 AM, Tom Christie wrote: > I see that as of 1.4 `HttpRequest.raw_post_data` is being marked as > "pending deprecation", and `HttpRequest.body` has been introduced. > This still leaves us with two ways to get at the request body - `.body` > and `.read()` > > If we're

HttpRequest.read(), HttpRequest.body, HttpRequest.raw_post_data

2012-02-23 Thread Tom Christie
I see that as of 1.4 `HttpRequest.raw_post_data` is being marked as "pending deprecation", and `HttpRequest.body` has been introduced. This still leaves us with two ways to get at the request body - `.body` and `.read()` If we're going to make the change of marking `raw_post_data` as