In article <8832ab6d-8def-45d1-92df-baac40e1c...@t36g2000prt.googlegroups.com>, alex23 <wuwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 22, 10:25 am, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote: > > Everytime I've worked with SQLAlchemy, I've run away screaming in the > > other direction. Sure, portability is a good thing, but at what cost? > > I've never found SQLAlchemy to be anything but sane and approachable. > It's really worth understanding _how_ it works so you can see there's > no magic happening there. > > What cost do you see inherit in the use of SQLAlchemy? The cost of understanding how it works :-) Seriously. I understand SQL. Well, I'm not a SQL wizard, but I understand enough to do what I need to do. Whenever I have to use SQLAlchemy, I always find myself knowing exactly what SQL I want to write and scratching my head to figure out how to translate that into SQLAlchemy calls.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
