Użytkownik Paul McNett napisał:
> http://trac.dabodev.com/changeset/5846
>
> Historically, biz.scan() was calling biz._moveToRowNum() without sending the
> updateChildren argument, so therefore updateChildren == True.
>
> Now, it calls biz._moveToRowNum() and does send updateChildren, which 
> defaults to False.
>
> Was it intended to change the behavior? I can see why we'd want scan() to not 
> requery
> the children if the children aren't important in the context of this 
> particular
> scan(), as an optimization, but my code assumed that the children would be 
> updated in
> the scan(), as this has always been the case.
>
> Sorry I didn't catch it at the time. I remember reviewing this changeset but 
> I didn't
> realize the assumption (that scan() didn't requery children) was wrong.
>
> For now, I'm going to revert this changeset from my app's dabo, so I can send 
> a fix
> to my customers immediately. For the long term I need to know if the current 
> behavior
> is the intended behavior, in which case I'll review all my scan() calls to 
> determine
> which ones need the ScanRequeryChildren flag set.
>
> Having the default being the way that will work in all cases 
> (requeryChildren=True)
> and allowing optimization (requeryChildren=False) as an explicit step-up would
> probably be safer.
>
>    
Hi,

Probably I'm the initiator of whole confusion.
Please, look at #1351.
I do agree with you, that 'scan()' should requery children, but it 
didn't for me.

-- 
Regards
Jacek Kałucki


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]

Reply via email to