That answers my question. Thanks! Perhaps I'll try to make
matched-vs-updated a point of discussion for Django 2.0. As for the other
stuff, I'll give consideration to work on save_base and maybe work up a
proposal there.
--
Steven
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 26
On 26 kesä, 08:41, Steven Cummings wrote:
> Sorry for chiming in so late. I very much like the goals of this effort,
> particularly bringing clarity to some of the internal APIs. Some related
> points for your consideration:
No problem. I have been so busy lately that I haven't gotten a single
co
Sorry for chiming in so late. I very much like the goals of this effort,
particularly bringing clarity to some of the internal APIs. Some related
points for your consideration:
* Would the rows matched vs. updated issue be resolved or clarified in this
effort [1]?
* It seems like the work I had st
On 14 kesä, 10:59, Aymeric Augustin
wrote:
> Hello Anssi,
>
> I'm familiar with the topic since I tried to review some of your
> refactoring patches (before you gained the ability to commit them
> yourself).
>
> I'm convinced that this refactoring is useful, because it is likely to
> fix some bugs
Hello Anssi,
I'm familiar with the topic since I tried to review some of your
refactoring patches (before you gained the ability to commit them
yourself).
I'm convinced that this refactoring is useful, because it is likely to
fix some bugs, especially in features that were added to the ORM long
a
On 13/06/12 17:15, Luke Plant wrote:
> I think this is a very necessary piece of work. The problem with that
> layer of code is that it is very difficult to really grok and therefore
> to review patches. It would take almost as much effort to do a review of
> a substantial patch as the patch itsel
On 13/06/12 08:09, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
> Accidentally clicked send... So, what I am asking is: Is there support
> for ORM refactoring, and the "small step at time" way of doing it? If
> the ORM refactorings are to be done, it will be hard to get reviews.
> In practice I would need to commit pa
On 13 kesä, 09:50, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
> I am asking for directions about what to do about
> django.db.models.sql.query (actually sql.*). I would like to refactor
> the code in small incremental steps. However, this will bring internal
> API breakages, and will likely add some more bugs tempor
I am asking for directions about what to do about
django.db.models.sql.query (actually sql.*). I would like to refactor
the code in small incremental steps. However, this will bring internal
API breakages, and will likely add some more bugs temporarily.
While the ORM mostly works, it IMHO needs so
On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 15:30 +0100, Michael Radziej wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've recently read Malcolm's blog entry about __iter__ and __len__ in the
> refactored QuerySets. Interesting!
>
> In the refactored QuerySet, if you do e.g.
>
> if models.Something.objects.all():
> ...
>
> then Q
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please note that psycopg2's cursor.execute() doesn't really respect
> DB-API either, in the sense that .fetchone does actually fetch the
> entire resultset into the python process unless the cursor is named,
> i.e. conn
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I see one possible problem: I observe that mysql always slurps in the
> > whole result set from the database when you only issue
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see one possible problem: I observe that mysql always slurps in the
> whole result set from the database when you only issue a select
> (cursor.query(...))
*Sigh*.
> Theoretically, it's probably possible to work
Hi,
I've recently read Malcolm's blog entry about __iter__ and __len__ in the
refactored QuerySets. Interesting!
In the refactored QuerySet, if you do e.g.
if models.Something.objects.all():
...
then QuerySet.__nonzero__ will execute the query and try to fetch the first
result.
I
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 21:23 +, David Cramer wrote:
> Any chance of a status update?
There are a few very small changes uncommitted in my local tree. I'm
currently travelling and only a few hours to work on it.
You can see the status by looking at the branch updates, though.
Malcolm
--~--
Any chance of a status update?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send
16 matches
Mail list logo
