From: Lele Gaifax Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:20:38 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Fix markup glitch X-Git-Tag: rel_0_5_3~18 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=b2204616c70d8db9990b086e900a0b915eb31bbd;p=thirdparty%2Fsqlalchemy%2Fsqlalchemy.git Fix markup glitch --- diff --git a/doc/build/ormtutorial.rst b/doc/build/ormtutorial.rst index a0db4369c7..a6ca6d9844 100644 --- a/doc/build/ormtutorial.rst +++ b/doc/build/ormtutorial.rst @@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ The ``relation()`` function is extremely flexible, and could just have easily be # .... addresses = relation(Address, order_by=Address.id, backref="user") -We are also free to not define a backref, and to define the func:`relation()` only on one class and not the other. It is also possible to define two separate :func:`relation` constructs for either direction, which is generally safe for many-to-one and one-to-many relations, but not for many-to-many relations. +We are also free to not define a backref, and to define the :func:`relation()` only on one class and not the other. It is also possible to define two separate :func:`relation` constructs for either direction, which is generally safe for many-to-one and one-to-many relations, but not for many-to-many relations. When using the ``declarative`` extension, ``relation()`` gives us the option to use strings for most arguments that concern the target class, in the case that the target class has not yet been defined. This **only** works in conjunction with ``declarative``: