On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 13:13 -0800, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > > On Jan 30, 1:36 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 23:21 -0800, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > I was hoping there was another way. Of course subclassing's not hard > > > to do, but it means doing it for every field class. I was looking at > > > moving an application over from SQLAlchemy, which offers this feature > > > both for models and fields. > > > > That's not very natural Python behaviour, though. You can't expect to > > pass in extra arbitrary arguments to class constructors for normal > > Python classes and have them hold onto it for later collection. > > > > I didn't find anything unusual about it. SQLAlchemy does this by > design [1], to allow users to attach additional meta-data, which the > SQLAlchemy team haven't thought of, to their tables and columns.
At the risk of beating a dead horse: I didn't say it wasn't a good idea in SQLAlchemy. I was pointing out that it isn't normal *Python* behaviour. So it would be unexpected for a class to support that behaviour, rather than natural. Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" 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/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
