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

Django 5.0

djangoproject.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 237 posts

Re: Django 5.0

#151

Post by iamsanteri »

bdcravens wrote: post #139

I work in the Rails world, and perhaps my perception is colored by the big changes they tend to make, but this seems like more of a minor than a major version release? Or is this relatively big for Django?

I'd be also interested to hear someone proficient have an opinion about this. A 5.0 update sounds like something big. What about the rest of the async parts in Django having been in the process of being re-written since a while, as I've heard? Also has it ever been considered to build some deeper integration of Celery for enabling and handling in-memory background job processing in a more closely and "better-integrated" way akin to Rails' active job?

Re: Django 5.0

#152

Post by Darmody »

biorach wrote: post #143
Darmody wrote: post #123

I usually hear this question the other way around but there it goes. Why should someone consider Django instead of something like Symfony or Laravel?

Because they know, or want to know Python

Thank you, mister, but I mean from a techy point of view.

Re: Django 5.0

#153

Post by globular-toast »

scrollaway wrote: post #24

A huge part of the work I did the past year (and still do sometimes, email in my profile) was helping people transition from a full legacy django app to a lightweight django backend with rest api and a react frontend. Django Ninja makes it especially pleasant. I think django should really embrace this in the future. Make it easier to drop the superfluous parts; forms, templates … I don’t know what that will look like…

I've gone the opposite way. Started converting views to rest framework viewsets and building React components on the front end. It just created more problems. Now the React stuff is considered legacy and we're using HTMX and the bare minimum of vanilla JS when necessary.

Re: Django 5.0

#154

Post by anon373839 »

quantiq wrote: post #105

Django is such a lovely framework I can't speak higher praises of it. I'm blessed to still be able to use it in my day to day work. It's maybe not the most flashy framework out there these days but Django and Rails are really the Toyota Corollas and Honda Civics of the web dev world that often go so underappreciated for their unfussy reliability. :)

I’d say they’re the Lexuses of the web dev world. Very nicely appointed and rock-solid, just not very sexy.

Re: Django 5.0

#156

Post by antod »

BasilPH wrote: post #30
danpalmer wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always felt, and this hasn't changed recently, that if you're going to need more than, say, 3 of the cross cutting concerns that Django provides for, then it'll be much more maintainable in the long run to just use Django rather than effectively building a custom solution out of parts. The flip side: if you're building a small internal API that only needs a couple of these, Django might be overkill. What do I me…

I agree. I would even go so far as to say that if you need an ORM, go with Django. I've wasted too much time adding SQLAlchemy to Flask to get something that is still worse than the Django ORM.

They way I'd look at it - if your app owns the database and schema, use Django. If your app is connecting into someone else's database or databases (like in enterprises with DBA priesthoods etc), the flexibility of SQLAlchemy can fit better around arbitrary schemas etc.

Re: Django 5.0

#157

Post by mixmastamyk »

Klonoar wrote: post #137
dinkleberg wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you on this, Django + HTMX + Vanilla JS (where needed) just works which is a beautiful thing. Is building out the UI clunkier with Django templates than with JSX? Absolutely. But not having to worry about both server and client side state is such a time saver and you know it is going to continue to work. For the past few years I've been using Go (using Gin) in place of Django, and it works nicely and is quit…

An approach I've done in the past for projects that are publicly API-based: Django handles the database migrations and user accounts/models/etc - and you get the useful admin to boot, which is just incredible if you ever need to open up the data layer to someone else. Then just write the API interface in Go/Rust/your language of choice. It decouples the DB modeling from the API layer, but in practice... I've just not…

It's not a bad idea, but the tradeoff is usually you'll have to define your models twice. For whatever reason, that tends to happen anyway, so not that big a drawback in practice.

Re: Django 5.0

#158

Post by robertlagrant »

pmontra wrote: post #145
robertlagrant wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sort of said this elsewhere. Others are saying "that's just what happens" and "well, Python?" but it doesn't just happen, and slow database queries are nothing to do with the application language. The problem is Django ORM, like Ruby on Rails, uses the Active Record pattern. Alternate ORMs, such as SQLAlchemy or Hibernate, uses Data Mapper pattern, which avoids the pitfalls of Active Record.

We can have 1+N queries in any language even without an ORM. Maybe an ORM facilitates mistakes because it hides joins but lack of experience is lack of experience. Some naive bad pseudocode: for book in select * from books: author = select * from authors where id == book.id print book.title author.name In the real world that nested select could be hidden many levels down in method or function calls or even in code ru…

I'm not criticising ORMs, just how active record works.

Re: Django 5.0

#159

Post by rglullis »

rollcat wrote: post #102
ralmidani wrote: post #35

Django made me fall in love with programming 13 years ago, and since then it has always had a special place in my heart. I’m revisiting a business idea I was working on for a couple years, before I sought and found employment in the industry (where I used Java for a couple years, then Elixir for a couple more). My project was built with Django and Django REST Framework, and Ember on the client-side. 6 years later, th…

> 6 years later, the Django side needed minimal changes and is up and running (I jumped all the way from 1.11 to 5.0 beta). I've been using Django since before 1.0, and the upgrade story has been nothing short of fantastic for something that's been around this long. But still, YMMV! Depending on how ancient a project you run into, it definitely can be a major pain, even with the original authors' best intentions. For…

> The builtin admin system is also a pretty decent CMS on its own (...) It's wise to get off the builtin admin system as your project grows.

And go to another superbly robust and easy to use actual CMS: wagtail.

Post reply on HN