IMHO, I think that would be much better. Larry
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Leafe Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 8:15 PM To: Dabo Users list Subject: Re: [dabo-users] Filtering setAll On May 1, 2007, at 3:23 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > self.setAll("Enabled", ok2edit ,filt="Class == RAClasses.RATextBox and > BaseClass == dabo.ui.dTextBox and Editable==False") The code for setAll() reads: for kid in kids: ok = hasattr(kid, prop) if ok: if filt: ok = eval("kid.%s" % filt) So we're evaluating the passed filter expression as if it were a single property. Your expression would result in: kid.Class == RAClasses.RATextBox and BaseClass == dabo.ui.dTextBox and Editable==False Clearly, that's not going to work. Perhaps this could be changed to allow passing a tuple, with each element being compared in the manner that the current code works. So instead of what you wrote, it would look like: self.setAll("Enabled", ok2edit ,filt=("Class is RAClasses.RATextBox", "BaseClass is dabo.ui.dTextBox", "Editable isFalse")) Does that look like something that would work for you? -- Ed Leafe -- http://leafe.com -- http://dabodev.com [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/!&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
