On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-
replacing __init__(...) - i see that some effort is taken to keep the
original signature. But the result wont be debuggable IMO.
cant it be some_init(*a,**kw) doing whatever( *a,**kw) and/or calling
original_init(*a,**kw) ?
Michael Bayer wrote:
On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-
replacing __init__(...) - i see that some effort is taken to keep the
original signature. But the result wont be debuggable IMO.
cant it be some_init(*a,**kw) doing whatever( *a,**kw) and/or calling
On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
should have one more argument iterator_func, and that to be passed
whatever the Visitor's .iterate is, instead of using hardcoded
fine. r4607:
def traverse_using(iterator, obj, visitors):
visit the given expression structure using
On Wednesday 30 April 2008 18:25:25 Michael Bayer wrote:
On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
should have one more argument iterator_func, and that to be
passed whatever the Visitor's .iterate is, instead of using
hardcoded
fine. r4607:
def traverse_using(iterator,
On Apr 30, 2008, at 12:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 30 April 2008 18:25:25 Michael Bayer wrote:
On Apr 30, 2008, at 8:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
should have one more argument iterator_func, and that to be
passed whatever the Visitor's .iterate is, instead of using
i have some obj.pre_save() hook-method that is called just before
session.save_or_update( obj), to do last-point validations and/or
setup of timestamp-like fields.
There's an idea/ need to replace that with
mapper_extension.before_insert() but i'm not sure if these are
going to be
fine. r4607:
def traverse_using(iterator, obj, visitors):
visit the given expression structure using the given
iterator of objects.
yeah, i how i get the ClauseVisitor to use that...
The idea was for the ClauseVisitor's traverse to use
ClauseVisitor's iterate (or _iterate),
