On Monday 04 June 2007 18:03:05 Rick Morrison wrote:
> > Well, I don't really see the connection between .scalar() and
> > .list(), other than they are kind of antonyms, but FWIW I always
> > thought that .list() was an odd duck anyway, seeing as how the
> > arguably more Pythonic list(query) works fine.
>
> (expanding on this a bit)
>
> More generally, it's the iterative nature of a query object that
> makes a lot of the .first() and so on more semantic sugar than
> anything else anyway.
exactly. "All()" is much better than "list()", in the means of list
being just the current way/implementation of using ordered sequences.
i guess it could return another container as well (like relation()).
even if all these are gone:
for row in query:
process(row)
break
will give u .first()
and
for row in query:
process(row)
break
else: raise someError
will give u .one()
svil
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
