On Aug 18, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Aug 18, 2014, at 10:21 AM, Stephan Hügel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Yep, I'm using naming_convention, and can confirm that the drop operation >> isn't being wrapped by f(). >> >> (And also autogenerate, for the avoidance of ambiguity) > > the rendering of drop_constraint does not include the "type" parameter (it > probably should but that's a separate issue). However I see this parameter > rendered in your script at > https://gist.github.com/urschrei/541fec05a3a82d71cbe9. > > also I have added a test for this case and am not able to reproduce - the > op.f() is rendered in the drop case for the unique constraint. > > are you sure this is straight autogenerate for the "drop" ? still unsure about "type" but if i give the constraint a name, then we are seeing the op.f() omitted, so that must be your case. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy-alembic" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
