+1. Looks finished to me. I'd like to contribute on this one way or
another. I'll try to make sure `django-simple-url` is as compatible with
this as possible. If need be I'm willing to change the current license if
it's not compatible with inclusion in Django core.
On Wednesday, October 5,
I've iterated on the pre-proposal, with what I think represents the best
options to date.
https://gist.github.com/tomchristie/cb388f0f6a0dec931c611775f32c5f98
The updates are:
* Using a different name for the syntax: `path()`.
* Dropping the leading slashes.
* Simplifying the "unintended
Just a short note from the one that started the first thread after finding
the regexps hard to read:
Thanks for this Tom, this is exactly what I was looking for! <3
On Monday, 3 October 2016 12:24:04 UTC+2, Tom Christie wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I wanted to push forward the consideration of
Hey All,
Sorry all. I accidentally submitted my message somehow.
I wanted to say that I like the direction Django is going compared to the
other Python frameworks for its routing. I've looked at Express.js,
angularjs, rails, and MVC.NET as well. And Django is definitely the easiest
to read
I'm quite excited about this: it's definitely gonna solve some of the pain
points we're facing when teaching Django to Django Girls! Big +1 to include
it in core.
I recently started dabbling a bit in Rails, and wondered if it'd be
possible here to get rid of the converter in the syntax at all, or
Hey Tom,
I really like your current implementation. I think it's an elegant solution
to a complex problem, and I like that you looked at Flask for some
inspiration.
I thought that to round out the discussion I'd do a quick comparison to
other frameworks. (I've added in slug examples):
