On Nov 14, 2008, at 11:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > isn't it going to be usable if > klas.some2many_relation == obj > is automaticaly rendered as > klas.some2many_relation.contains( obj) > ? > unless the == in that case has some other meaning... we took that case out, its behavior was ambiguous and not really correct from any relational standpoint. (btw whats "sometomany" ? "manytomany" not sufficient ? its hard to parse these emails sometimes...) > i'm using some query-building-functions over mixture of plain > references and many2many and switching between the syntaxes depending > on the attr is somewhat guesswork. In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess. > btw same goes for > klas.some2many_relation.has( ... ) into .any() if you really have to work this way, Class.attrname.property.direction will be any of ONETOMANY, MANYTOONE, MANYTOMANY --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
