It's a horrible hack, but did you know that you can change the class
of an instance by assigning to its __class__ attribute? I've no idea
if SA does anything that would stop this from working, but you could
try it. Start by creating a subclass of Table with your extra methods,
then iterate over
No offence but it feels like direct route to the hell. Monkeypatching is
acknowledged to be really bad practise in general with few exemptions.
On Thursday, August 1, 2013 9:47:45 AM UTC-4, Simon King wrote:
It's a horrible hack, but did you know that you can change the class
of an instance
as I mentioned earlier, SQLAlchemy-Migrate has done it this way for years.
I'm not a fan of it which was one of several reasons I wrote Alembic, but it
does work for them.
On Aug 1, 2013, at 10:21 AM, askel dummy...@mail.ru wrote:
No offence but it feels like direct route to the hell.
I did this to quickly test my own extended ResultProxy object, but as soon
figured out how easy was to properly instantiate a new ResultProxy subclass
from an existing ResultProxy object, I got rid of this monkeypatching. I'd
like to avoid that route if possible.
Thanks! :)
g.
On Thu, Aug 1,
Hello there,
When this application starts, we reflect the DB into a MetaData() object
and this is made available for everyone to use.
I'd like to add a few more methods to the table objects within that
MetaData(). Is there any easy way to extend these already
instantiated
You'd probably implement your own reflect_all function/method:
from sqlalchemy import inspect
def reflect(metadata, bind):
inspector = inspect(bind)
for tname in inspector.get_table_names():
MySpecialTable(tname, metadata, autoload=True, autoload_with=bind)
On Jul 31, 2013, at
oh, except you might have problems with tables in there that are reflected due
to a foreign key.Table is not really intended for subclassing, unless you
want to do SQLAlchemy-Migrate's approach of monkeypatching Table.__bases__ at
the global level, I'd seek some other way to achieve what
Thanks for the reply Michael... I had a hunch this wouldn't be easy to
tackle, but this is more than I can chew at the moment: )
For now, I'll just keeping doing what I'm already doing which is to
instantiate a new class taking the table as an argument, and then within my
class reference the
