On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 21:34 -0700, Gary Wilson wrote: > Thinking of this some more, I'm wondering about the names is_logged_in > or is_authenticated. They could be a little misleading since they > aren't really checking if the user is logged in or not. One might be > led to believe that they could do something like logged_in_users = > [user.is_logged_in() for user in User.objects.all()] or something like > user = User.objects.get(username='fred'); if user.is_logged_in(): ... > > It seems that maybe the is_anonymous function is just a way for the > object to say it's either an AnonymousUser object or it's not an > AnonymousUser object.
Hmm ... good points. We document is_anonymous() the way you describe it in the last paragraph. In the same document, we use it in the slightly accident-prone fashion your original post (and the thread on django-users) described. Considering alternatives in order of decreasing "stuipdness": one fix is to make improvement in the documentation: "If you are going to put a "members only" block of text up, you should check that user.id evaluates as True." It is guaranteed that id == None on AnonymousUser objects. Another possibility is to call the name "not_anonymous" (but not really that name, since it's a pretty stupid name). Does "registered" work as a name? I guess I prefer finding a better name, rather than hoping for "success through documentation". Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
