>> >> What would be the most natural way of specifying an ordering for >> >> columns? >> > >> > SQLObject preserves the order of columns, indices and joins since at >> > least version 0.14.0; the order of every object is stored in the >> > attribute .creationOrder. Lists of columns (sqlmeta.columnList), indices >> > (sqlmeta.indexes and sqlmeta.indexDefinitions) and join definitions >> > (sqlmeta.joinDefinitions) are sorted according to .creationOrder; the >> > list of joins (sqlmeta.joins) is not sorted due to the way joins are >> > created. >> >> Great, thank you very much, I did not know about this feature! > > Most of it was implemented by Ian Bicking long before me. At version > 0.14.0 I completed it, extended to indices and joins and added to News: > > http://sqlobject.org/News.html#sqlobject-0-14-0
I see, I missed it. Now that we are at it I was wondering whether something similar could be adopted for tables too. The order in which the tables are defined, class table1( SQLObject ), class table2( SQLObject ), etc, etc, could also be significant and one might want to remember this ordering. And since there is all sorts of metaclass trickery involved with class creation, maybe the ordering could be stored. What do you think? Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb _______________________________________________ sqlobject-discuss mailing list sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss
