On May 15, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Nick Murphy wrote:
> > Hello Group, > > After looking over the 0.5 migration notes and seeing that implicit > ordering is to be removed, it seems to me that it might make sense to > change the default collection class for unordered relations from a > list to a multiset. This would reinforce that unless order_by is > specified, one cannot rely on a collection having a particular order. > I could see this as helpful in preventing bugs when switching between > databases (e.g. from MySQL to PostgreSQL) with different default > ordering behaviors. > it is worth considering. though im not sure if i like the implicit "order by changes the default collection class", only because it might get kind of confusing. if we had a totally explicit "collection class is required" approach, that would be something different (like, cant use "list" as a collection unless order_by is present). We might just say in any case that "order_by" is required with "list"....but then that might be too steep a change for 0.4 to 0.5, and also it gets a little weird in that we dont necessarily know how well the collection is list-like/set-like. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
