can i have an example
On Jul 30, 2007, at 5:51 PM, Jorge Godoy wrote:
Michael Bayer wrote:
a lot. no decorators for now.
Not even the way we did on TurboGears that mimics the PEAK
decorators? This
way, people can use @decorator(param) on Python 2.4+ and can
use [decorator(param)]
Michael Bayer ha scritto:
can i have an example
http://trac.turbogears.org/browser/branches/1.0/turbogears/database.py?rev=2320
281 [run_with_transaction.when(_use_sa())]
282 def sa_rwt(func, *args, **kw):
283 log.debug(New SA transaction)
284 transaction =
Marco Mariani wrote:
Michael Bayer ha scritto:
can i have an example
http://trac.turbogears.org/browser/branches/1.0/turbogears/database.py?rev=2320
281 [run_with_transaction.when(_use_sa())]
282 def sa_rwt(func, *args, **kw):
283 log.debug(New SA transaction)
ive considered this so if someone is willing to submit a patch that
would be great.
On Jul 30, 2007, at 1:46 AM, Michael Pearson wrote:
Hi,
Are there plans to print warnings when deprecated methods are used?
I've just spent the morning future-proofing our code against SA 0.4
and would
On Jul 30, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
I can probably do this tonight.
How many people are still using 2.3? Decorator syntax would be
nice for this.
a lot. no decorators for now.
Also it would be nice to not have to remember that I can't use genexps
in SA code.
it
I can probably do this tonight.
How many people are still using 2.3? Decorator syntax would be nice for this.
Also it would be nice to not have to remember that I can't use genexps
in SA code.
But 2.3 is a pretty good base, I don't miss much else from 2.4. :)
On 7/30/07, Michael Bayer [EMAIL
Michael Bayer wrote:
a lot. no decorators for now.
Not even the way we did on TurboGears that mimics the PEAK decorators? This
way, people can use @decorator(param) on Python 2.4+ and can
use [decorator(param)] on Python 2.3. At the same place (before the
method / function declaration).
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:36:50 -
Michael Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey ho -
after around 400 revisions the 0.4 branch is merged to trunk:
http://svn.sqlalchemy.org/sqlalchemy/trunk
Congratulations on the progress for the next generation! That goes for
you, Michael Bayer, and
one suggesstion / request.
As your changing everything anyway, can u replace all important {} and
dict() with some util.Dict, and set() with util.Set?
util.Ones can point to dict/set.
The reason is so they can be further globally replaced by user with
OrderedOnes, for example to achieve
here the changes i needed to get dbcook (abstraction layer over SA),
and its tests going to some extent (70% - relations and expressions
are broken):
- BoundMetaData - MetaData - lots (15)
- metadata.engine.echo=True - lots (14)
Whats the difference between create_engine's echo=boolean and
I'd want to make sure this didn't hurt performance first. (Seems
innocuous enough, but if it's in any sort of inner loop the extra hash
lookup might be noticeable.)
On 7/27/07, svilen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one suggesstion / request.
As your changing everything anyway, can u replace all
On Friday 27 July 2007 19:48:51 Jonathan Ellis wrote:
I'd want to make sure this didn't hurt performance first. (Seems
innocuous enough, but if it's in any sort of inner loop the extra
hash lookup might be noticeable.)
if lookup is made once in the start of function, should be okay.
which
12 matches
Mail list logo
