Django as exemplary design
in [Python]
|
Prev: long int computations
Next: duplicate temporary file?
From: TomF on 3 May 2010 15:24 I'm interested in improving my python design by studying a large, well-designed codebase. Someone (not a python programmer) suggested Django. I realize that Django is popular, but can someone comment on whether its code is well-designed and worth studying? Thanks, -Tom
From: Carl Banks on 3 May 2010 16:13 On May 3, 12:24 pm, TomF <tomf.sess...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I'm interested in improving my python design by studying a large, > well-designed codebase. Someone (not a python programmer) suggested > Django. I realize that Django is popular, but can someone comment on > whether its code is well-designed and worth studying? I once delved into django because I wanted to use a couple of the administrative tools for non-web tasks, and found it to be disappointingly ad hoc. It it makes some assumptions about file locations and module names (unnecessarily, IMO). It works well as long as someone sticks to the rigid conventions, but can't cope well with deviances. Therefore I'd call its codebase less than exemplary. As a tool it's quite good (as long as you can stick to the prescribed layout) but that's a different question. Carl Banks
From: Bruno Desthuilliers on 4 May 2010 03:37 TomF a �crit : > I'm interested in improving my python design by studying a large, > well-designed codebase. Someone (not a python programmer) suggested > Django. I realize that Django is popular, but can someone comment on > whether its code is well-designed and worth studying? > Carl makes some valid points in his answer, and there are indeed a couple dark corners in this area - bit it's just a part of the whole framework. There are still things worth studying in Django IHMO, specially if you're interested in seeing metaclasses and descriptors at work.
From: Michael.Coll-Barth on 4 May 2010 10:23 > From: alex23 > (I also think there's value to be gained in studying _bad_ code, > too...) Oh, very true. And not just true for python. But, only if an 'expoert' points out why it is bad and provides an alternative. And saying things like, "it isn't pyhonic" or that such and such is a more "pythonic way" is NOT helpful.
From: Carl Banks on 4 May 2010 17:27
On May 4, 12:37 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno. 42.desthuilli...(a)websiteburo.invalid> wrote: > TomF a écrit : > > > I'm interested in improving my python design by studying a large, > > well-designed codebase. Someone (not a python programmer) suggested > > Django. I realize that Django is popular, but can someone comment on > > whether its code is well-designed and worth studying? > > Carl makes some valid points in his answer, and there are indeed a > couple dark corners in this area - bit it's just a part of the whole > framework. There are still things worth studying in Django IHMO, > specially if you're interested in seeing metaclasses and descriptors at > work. Absolutely. I said it was "less than exemplary", i.e., still pretty good. Carl Banks |