I like having the base of my models be <mypackage>.model.Base . That name does a good job of describing what role the class plays; it is the common base on which each model is built.
If I were mixing declarative and non-declarative models, then I could understand wanting the declarative ones to be distinguished as such, but as long as I have a common base for my models (which is also the case in the declarative documentation), I like it being called model.Base rather than being named after an implementation detail. Declarative is also longer and more annoying to type. On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Apr 2, 2:41 pm, "J. Cliff Dyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It makes me twitch when I see the following: > > > > Base = declarative_base(metadata=metadata) > > > > class Spam(Base): > > ... > > > > Base is a singularly undescriptive name to use for the base class of a > > declarative table class. People are doing this because it's in the > > documentation. If it were changed there, I think people would generally > > follow along. Would others be in favor of changing the documentation to > > something like this? > > > > Declarative = declarative_base(metadata=metadata) > > > > class Spam(Declarative): > > ... > > > > I'd be happy to implement the change throughout the declarative docs if > > there's support for the idea. > > > > Its widely known that I defer all naming decisions to others....do we > like Declarative, or something more ActiveRecord-y ? > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
