Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Django 2.0 released

docs.djangoproject.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 177 posts

Re: Django 2.0 released

#111

Post by JshWright »

erichurkman wrote: post #10
LeoJiWoo wrote: post #3

Wow, I remember being curious about Django a year ago. Now it's at 2.0 ! It already felt overwhelming then, but now even more so. I can't wait to check it out more. On a sidenote, I feel bad for the developers who have to migrate to Django 2.0. Hopefully it's not too much work, I know a codebase review and full update can't be fun with the business managers and customers at your throat.

If you're already at 1.11 and on Python 3, it should not be too bad of an upgrade. If you have to go from an earlier version _and_ do the swap from Python 2 to 3, you may be in for a world of pain.

Yeah, make the 2.7 -> 3 (preferably 3.5+) transition on 1.11, _then_ do the 1.11 -> 2.0 upgrade.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#112

Post by gspetr »

ngrilly wrote: post #90
mundanevoice wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been writing Django professionally since 2013, It's ain't that bad. Our codebase is huge & it never takes us more than 2 weeks to do it and lately, it has always gotten less and less. Wonder if the issue is with your codebase that it breaks so much on upgrades. Python3 upgrade is a task, agreed. But it actually gives good returns. The language is nicer to write in and we even saved some memory and CPU on the s…

Saved some memory and CPU after the upgrade? Could you give some numbers?

https://thenewstack.io/instagram-makes-smooth-move-python-3/

How has Python 3 performed since then?

"Ding: We did not have performance gain expectations for Python 3 right out of the box.

So it was a pleasant surprise to see 12 percent CPU savings (on uswgi/Django) and 30 percent memory savings (on celery).

It’s only been four months since rollout, we don’t expect to see constant 10 percent performance improvement, but that was a very promising start."

Re: Django 2.0 released

#113

Post by enraged_camel »

blunte wrote: post #30
_arvin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python - Django Ruby - Rails PHP - Laravel all nice choices

And if you don't mind the learning curve (which will make you a better thinker!), I would add Elixir - Phoenix I wish there was a complete Clojure - ???

Elixir with Phoenix is phenomenal. An absolute joy to use.

Elixir itself is an excellent language that leveraged the strengths of the Erlang VM, and Phoenix is like a massively improved, blazing fast and reliable version of Rails.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#114

Post by omegote »

skshetry wrote: post #7

As a beginner/intermediate level myself, I think new routing syntax, which is similar to flask is itself a major feature of the django 2.0. This really simplifies the url routing than the regex(which is lot powerful though). For simple projects of mine, it may well cover 60-80% of my needs, maybe more.

Indeed. The somehow clunky syntax for named groups in python re was (in my opinion) a big drawback with old style routing. I hope this new style gains traction.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#115

Post by orf »

gspetr wrote: post #112
ngrilly wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saved some memory and CPU after the upgrade? Could you give some numbers?

https://thenewstack.io/instagram-makes-smooth-move-python-3/ How has Python 3 performed since then? "Ding: We did not have performance gain expectations for Python 3 right out of the box. So it was a pleasant surprise to see 12 percent CPU savings (on uswgi/Django) and 30 percent memory savings (on celery). It’s only been four months since rollout, we don’t expect to see constant 10 percent performance improvement, b…

Removing the 2/3 compatibility shims saves a lot of code and runtime cost, that could be a contributing factor.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#116

Post by thijsvandien »

orf wrote: post #71
dizzystar wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, come on. There are plenty of large websites written in flask. It's not that hard to use at all, and all those things you list are definitely a part of it. Hell, I have a 20 KLOC website written in bottle, and no one ever said it was poorly done, insecure, and so on. The problem is that a lot of people writing Python web stacks don't know how to write Python at all, and no framework will save that shortcoming.

Part of my point was that if your site is going to be 20 KLOC then why not use a framework that is aimed at building 20 KLOC large sites rather than one that is aimed at writing 200 line sites. Flask is advertised as a micro framework. if you want to rebuild Django with it then sure you can, but I personally can't see why you'd want to.

Does eventually needing a truck justify driving one when for now everything fits in a van? The structure Django imposes on you may get in the way while you're still experimenting.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#117

Post by mjfisher »

fulafel wrote: post #37
whalesalad wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d posit that a simple crud app would take an order of magnitude less time with Rails. I’ve been a Django developer since 0.96 and have built dozens of apps with it. After transitioning to Rails, it’s hard to justify the use unless you’re in an evironment that absolutely must use Python.

Interesting. What would you say is the biggest reason for this >10x development speed difference?

Just wanted to anecdotally affirm whalesalad's experiences with my own. I desperately wanted to like Django more than Rails (I just really appreciate python as a language), but I find projects much quicker to build in Rails. It really is the convention-over-configuration magic that makes the difference. There's less to do in Rails to add commonly used web/crud functionality - but it's much less explicit and relies on you getting all the conventions correct. Rails is really the only framework that I've found fairly hard to learn, simply because you have to memorize the conventions to know e.g. where to pluralize and what magic helper methods will have been auto-generated. It should be noted I've never worked on a large Django project - I suspect once a site's data structure and main functionality has been nailed down and you get a larger team involved, Python and Django's 'explicit is better than implicit' design philosophy will start to provide increases in efficiency.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#119

Post by jsmeaton »

A good time to remind that Django has met all milestone, bug fix, and security fix release targets since the introduction of the Django Fellow which can only be funded with donations.

https://www.djangoproject.com/fundraising/

I’d like to encourage everyone that uses Django in a commercial setting to speak to their company about donating to the DSF to continue getting timely bug, security, and feature releases.

Re: Django 2.0 released

#120

Post by bastawhiz »

LeoJiWoo wrote: post #3

Wow, I remember being curious about Django a year ago. Now it's at 2.0 ! It already felt overwhelming then, but now even more so. I can't wait to check it out more. On a sidenote, I feel bad for the developers who have to migrate to Django 2.0. Hopefully it's not too much work, I know a codebase review and full update can't be fun with the business managers and customers at your throat.

I run a fairly large Django app. Looking at the release notes, it doesn't seem like it will take more than an hour or two to upgrade.
Post reply on HN