>> * How are applications supposed to perform write operations on a
>> FieldStorage, in 3.3 and the future?
>
> Personally I never considered writing to FieldStorage. I always thought
> of it as a read-only representation of a submitted form, but then that's
> just my mental map.
It's a pretty uncommon usage - it surprised me when I saw it in Trac.
Trac is using it to bundle additional request information gathered from
sources other than the form itself - it makes me suspect that someone in
the past thought "hey, we have this dictionary-like thing we are passing
around already - wouldn't it be nice if we could shove extra things in
it, rather than passing around another object too?", and then proceeded
to hack things so it was possible.
What I don't understand is why they don't put extra attributes in the
request object itself, since it supports that. This is done everywhere
in the publisher and the PSP handler. Fiddling with the FieldStorage
looks messy to me too - then again, if we promise a dict-like
interface we should make sure it is supported.
Regards,
Nicolas
