On Feb 19, 2008, at 4:57 PM, Duncan McGreggor wrote:

> On Feb 19, 2008 3:56 PM, Duncan McGreggor  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I like storm for the API. It's simple and it makes sense. It doesn't
>> try to do too much for me either. To be fair, I also like SQLAlchemy
>> for the API, but that's because other ORMs just didn't fit my brain
>> and SQLAlchemy was the closest I could get.
>
> Oops -- my apologies to the SQLAlchemy team, but that was supposed to
> be past tense "liked SQLAlchemy" not present tense.


but we're talking about the API as of late version 0.2, correct ?  The  
API looks quite different nowadays.   A typical Storm ORM conversation  
looks pretty similar to a SQLAlchemy ORM conversation (and this was  
widely observed when Storm was first announced).

In my Pycon presentation I'll be covering how SA 0.2 was an extremely  
abrupt transition from 0.1 which made for a fragile API and codebase  
at that time, why the change was necessary, and how we went about  
becoming a more usable and reliable tool by the late 0.3 series.




-- 
storm mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/storm

Reply via email to