attrs VS SQLAlchemy

Full support for validation and serialisation of attrs classes and msgspec Structs. Where previously only Pydantic models and types where supported, you can now mix and match any of these three libraries. In addition to this, adding support for another modelling library has been greatly simplified with the new plugin architecture

Pydantic is by far not the only library of its kind, with prominent members of the same class being attrs, cattrs or even plain dataclasses for some use cases.

Anything requiring e.g. setattr, getattr, delattr? Without looking far,

https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/blob/main/src/attr/_ma...

I was looking for an example of using locals() to "fill a data class from kwargs" or something similar to that. The example here doesn't use locals().

That aside, I generally wouldn't use the kwargs approach shown in this example either. I'd use [dataclasses](https://docs.python.org/3/library/dataclasses.html ) or [attrs](https://www.attrs.org/) instead.

hynek: developer of attrs

I continue to be surprised how easy it can be to consume a SOAP API with the right client libraries. Such as https://docs.python-zeep.org/en/master/ for Python. Now that's not to say it will always work, you can design a terrible API with any mechanism, no SOAP or REST client will help you if the other end has desided to succumb to madness and done something like turn their entire API into just "two endpoints" and driven by the payload content you post to the inbound endpoint, and you have to sit there polling the outbound endpoint with the inbound endpoints response ID because to find out what the eventual response is...

But horror story aside, consuming a decent SOAP endpoint with a good client library can be practically magical.

Between attrs (https://www.attrs.org/), cattrs (https://cattrs.readthedocs.io/), and the aforementioned zeep soap client I've got a serialisation pipeline from soap endpoint into an attrs dataclass with type hints and basic type validation down to a snippet so small it fits right here (type hints removed to minimise size).

  from zeep import helpers

attrs has at least two.

In SQLAlchemy, models representing database tables typically subclass sqlalchemy.orm.DeclarativeBase (this class supersedes the sqlalchemy.orm.declarative_base function). Accordingly, the abstract base class in this database wrapper component is a sqlalchemy.orm.DeclarativeBase subclass, accompanied by another custom base class providing additional dunder methods.

OK -

can we start considering binary files committed to a repo, even as data for tests, to be a huge red flag, and that the binary files themselves should instead be generated at testing time by source code that's stated as reviewable cleartext. This would make it much harder (though of course we can never really say "impossible") to embed a substantial payload in this way.

when binary files are part of a test suite, they are typically trying to illustrate some element of the program being tested, in this case a file that was incorrectly xz-encoded. Binary files like these weren't typed by hand, they will always ultimately come from something plaintext source.

Here's an example! My own SQLAlchemy repository has a few binary files in it! https://github.com/sqlalchemy/sqlalchemy/blob/main/test/bina... oh noes. Why are those files there? well in this case I just wanted to test that I can send large binary BLOBs into the database driver and I was lazy. This is actually pretty dumb, the two binary files here add 35K of useless crap to the source, and I could just as easily generate this binary data on the fly using a two liner that spits out random bytes. Anyone could see that two liner and know that it isn't embedding a malicious payload.

If I wanted to generate a poorly formed .xz file, I'd illustrate source code that generates random data, runs it through .xz, then applies "corruption" to it, like zeroing out the high bit of every byte. The process by which this occurs would be all reviewable in source code.

Besides, flama also provides support for SQL databases via SQLAlchemy, an SQL toolkit and Object Relational Mapper that gives application developers the full power and flexibility of SQL. Finally, flama also provides support for HTTP clients to perform requests via httpx, a next generation HTTP client for Python.

Alembic is a lightweight database migration tool for usage with SQLAlchemy. The term migration can be a little misleading, because in this context it doesn't mean to migrate to a different database in the sense of using a different version or a different type of database. In this context, migration refers to changes to the database schema: add a new column to a table, modify the type of an existing column, create a new index, etc..

To simplify this process, Cerbos developers have come up with adapters for popular Object-Relational Mapping (ORM) frameworks. You can check out for more details on the query plan repo - which also contains adapters for Prisma and SQLAlchemy - as well as a fully functioning application using Mongoose as its ORM.

That above pattern is one I've seen people do even recently, using the "select().c" attribute which from very early versions of SQLAlchemy is defined as "the columns from a subquery of the SELECT" ; this usage began raising deprecation warnings in 1.4 and is fully removed in 2.0 as it was a remnant of a much earlier version of SQLAlchemy. it will do exactly as you say, "make a subquery for each filter condition".

the moment you see SQLAlchemy doing something you see that seems "asinine", send an example to https://github.com/sqlalchemy/sqlalchemy/discussions and I will clarify what's going on, correct the usage so that the query you have is what you expect, and quite often we will add new warnings or documentation when we see people doing things we didn't anticipate.

The creator and lead maintainer of SQLAlchemy, one of the most popular and most used Python library for accessing databases (who doesn't?) gave a rather interesting response to PEP703.

If this doesn't ring any alarm bells I don't know what will.

> Basically for the moment the GIL-less idea would likely be burdensome for us and the fact that it's only an "option" seems to strongly imply major compatibility issues that we would not prefer.

https://github.com/sqlalchemy/sqlalchemy/discussions/10002#d...

Recently I discovered BigQuery public datasets - just over 200 datasets available for directly querying via SQL. I think this is a great thing! I can connect these direct to an analytics platform (we use Apache Superset which uses Python SQLAlchemy under the hood) for example and just start dashboarding.

When using python with sql databases like postgres or mariadb or SQLite you would use SQLAlchemy or another ORM of if you're feeling brave, you code it by hand. With ORMs you provide the address of your database and it connects for you, letting you use abstractions instead of writing all the SQL yourself (kind of analogous to using vlookups or index match instead of manually entering data).