Yeah, that might ultimately be the best way to go if things get too complicated. I think people might not want to re-run several lines of code to change some parameters but that could be a thing I make them just live with.
On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 3:06:57 AM UTC-5, Ladislav Lenart wrote: > > Hello. > > I think it would be (much) easier to simply rebuild the query from scratch > before each run. IMHO the time to build the query is not that big a factor > to > justify the added source code complexity. > > HTH, > > Ladislav Lenart > > > On 3.3.2016 05:47, Brian Cherinka wrote: > > > > > > well you need a list of names so from a mapped class you can get: > > > > for name in inspect(MyClass).column_attrs.keys(): > > if name in <whatever my filter thing is>: > > q = q.filter_by(name = bindparam(name)) > > > > though I'd think if you're dynamically building the query you'd have > the > > values already, not sure how it's working out that you need > bindparam() > > at that stage... > > > > > > Ok. I'll try this out. This looks like it could work. I think I need > it for > > the cases where a user specifies a query with condition e.g. X < 10, > runs it, > > gets results. Then they want to change the condition to X < 5 and rerun > the > > query. As far as I know, if condition 2 gets added into the filter, you > would > > have both X < 10 and X < 5 in your filter expression. Rather than a > single > > updated X < 5. > > > > What would be even more awesome is if there was a way to also update the > > operator in place as well. So changing X < 10 to X > 10. > > > > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
