> > Last argument, I promise.
I won't hold you to that. :-) > The existence of Query and Set objects are not a hidden implementation > details. For example, if the user is unaware of the presence of Query > objects, db(db.mytable.id == 3) shouldn't make any sense, as > db.mytable.id == 3 should return a boolean. How could passing a > boolean to db() possibly encode the information that makes up a query? > Right, but your proposed alternative has the same problem: (db.mytable.id > 0).select() What's a boolean doing with a select() method, and how could it encode the information that makes up a query? Overloading operators to produce a Query object is just as magical either way, and it needs to be explained to users in either case. If passing what appears to be a boolean to a callable class to produce a set is confusing, then treating what appears to be a boolean as a set itself should also be confusing. If your problem is with overloading operators to produce a Query, then deprecating Set doesn't solve that. > Learners should not be given the impression that 'DAL syntax' is > anything but just Python code. > Well, Python does allow operator overloading, so it is Python code, but again, it does not appear you are proposing an alternative to the overloading. > If learners take away the > lesson that query expressions are a magic special case in Python > itself, web2py is doing a disservice to those students. > Perhaps we could explain it better. > Removing Set would make the syntax slightly cleaner, but that's not > the important point: the comprehensible mental model of the objects is > more important than the syntax. > To me, passing query syntax plus optional parameters to a db object to define a set of records evokes a fairly comprehensible mental model -- at least as comprehensible as applying a chain of methods to some query syntax to define a set of records. Note, I'm not particularly against your proposed alternative (though I'm not crazy about the method chaining) -- I just don't find the case for it quite so compelling. It seems the operator overloading likely generates more confusion, and I don't think that is helped by the proposed syntax change. Anthony
