On 6/1/07, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What I'd rather see is either an error warning not to assign the > > result to anything, or to just have foo.append_whereclause() return > > the resulting foo. Is that a reasonable request, or are there reasons > > it shouldn't be done? Unnecessary, perhaps? > > > > making select() 'generative' has been under discussion. questions > include whether to copy the select each time before returning it as > well as what the methods should be called, i.e. maybe "where()" > instead of "append_whereclause()".
Returning None is a Python standard, see list.sort(). Making select generative is OK, but it should either modify the select in place or return a new one, not modify it and return it. That's a Perlism. "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." Something shorter than .append_whereclause() would be nice. .append_where or just .where come to mind. -- Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
