On Dec 3, 7:37 am, Todd Blanchard <tblanch...@mac.com> wrote: > I think you've kind of missed my point as there's not a view that can render > any object - but rather the name of the view is in the url. > > This is the url conf for a typical rails app. > > map.connect '', :controller => "public" > # Install the default route as the lowest priority. > map.connect ':controller/:action/:id.:format' > map.connect ':controller/:action/:id' > > That is the whole thing. Controllers are analogous to applications in > django, actions are like view functions, id is typically the primary key of > the object being viewed. format is new and could be .json, .xml, .html..... > I don't really use it just now. > > I see no reason ever to specify a more elaborate url. I want the equivalent > setup in my urls.py and then I never want to open that file again - relying > entirely on naming convention rather than configuration.
<snip> I really can't help thinking, based on this and some of your other messages, that Django isn't a good fit with the way you think. You might like to try another Python framework. Pylons might be better for you, as it uses Routes for its url despatch mechanism, and I believe that is quite close to the controller/action paradigm of Rails. -- DR. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
