Michael On Jul 3, 3:58 pm, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 3, 2008, at 5:05 AM, Iwan wrote: > > I was wondering if it is not possible to do something that is local to > > the current call-stack, instead of the current thread. > [SNIP] > > the "currentframe" usage is something I'd leave to the deeper Python > folks to argue over its appropriateness.
Yes, once I have established a use-case for it here, I'll discuss the mechanism on the python lists. > As far as SA's contextual > session, it was always meant to allow any kind of context, not just > threadlocal. Here, it would look like: > > Session = scoped_session(sessionmaker(), scopefunc=get_context) > > where "get_context" needs to return anything that is hashable, to key > off to the Session inside of a dict. OK, I've had a look at that code. Just to make sure I get it, would the following theoretically work? Assume I have a class, CC, which is smart enough to maintain a _singleton_ instance of a normal dict somewhere on the callstack. If you do CC.get_context(), it will always return that single dict. Assume also that CC.get_context_hash() returns id(CC.get_context()) Then, what you're saying is that I can do: Session = scoped_session(sessionmaker(), scopefunc=CC.get_context_hash) And that's it? Does this make sense? -i --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
