Chris Withers wrote: > Michael Bayer wrote: >>>> as far as implementation this feature isn't on >>>> my personal radar, so if you really want anytime soon you should >>>> provide a >>>> patch, which I can of course help with. >>> Cool, it is on my radar, but sadly pretty far away :-( >> >> you know, doing the "metaclass" approach is probably the first part of >> doing the "demarcated mixin" approach. >> >> here it is: >> http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/wiki/UsageRecipes/DeclarativeMixins > > Indeed, it'd just be great if the default declarative base mixin handled > this demarcation package already ;)
maybe someday. not until users actually use the recipes first and provide feedback. > > I argue about the comment on relations on that page, if the relation is > identical, it might well make sense to abstract it out and put it in the > mixin... just another complicated and error prone core function I'd rather not support. > > Chris > > -- > Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting > - http://www.simplistix.co.uk > > -- > 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. > > >
-- 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.
