On 10/10/11 17:10, Carl Meyer wrote: > FWIW, TemplateResponse was introduced in the same release as the CBVs, > and it allows these same generic utilities (sorting, filtering, > pagination) to be easily implemented as reusable decorators on top of > TemplateResponse-using views. Having tried both approaches in different > projects, I find the code using TemplateResponse and decorators more > concise, readable and maintainable than the equivalent using CBV mixins; > there are not nearly as many subtle ordering and what-calls-what-when > issues, method names to memorize, and extraneous super() noise.
I haven't tried using TemplateResponse much, but I have tried CBVs, and I've also found with relatively small projects that mixin ordering etc can be a real pain. Example: http://goo.gl/pzEVF (I learnt about the type.mro() method, which was fun, but that kind of thing should *not* be needed!) Regards, Luke -- "My capacity for happiness you could fit into a matchbox without taking out the matches first." (Marvin the paranoid android) Luke Plant || http://lukeplant.me.uk/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" 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-developers?hl=en.
