On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 00:46, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
> ...
>> Unfortunately I needed deferredimport and was completely unsure how
>> else to proceed at the time.
>> I use code generation for gae based models, and the unfortunately
>> reference ent
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
...
> Unfortunately I needed deferredimport and was completely unsure how
> else to proceed at the time.
> I use code generation for gae based models, and the unfortunately
> reference entities need actual models/classes which means you can very
Hi Jim
Yeah I agree with you.
I haven't ever distributed that version of zope.proxy , just used it
internally to support deferredimport.
zope.security could never to what it does with a pure python version
of zope.proxy. the 'c' wrappers are very important to ensure security.
Unfortunately I ne
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
> Hi
>
> As Attila pointed out, zope.proxy is possible to implement using
> peak.util.proxies
> if you only want some limited zope.proxy support. You won't get
> zope.security going down
> this path.
>
> I do that specifically so that I can use z
Hi
As Attila pointed out, zope.proxy is possible to implement using
peak.util.proxies
if you only want some limited zope.proxy support. You won't get
zope.security going down
this path.
I do that specifically so that I can use zope.deferredimport on app engine.
Below is the awful hacking I do t
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Baiju M wrote:
> Hi,
> Any idea how difficult it is to create optional C extensions
> for these packages:
>
> zope.container
> zope.hookable
> zope.proxy
> zope.security
I believe it is very hard, if not impossible, for zope.proxy and
zope.security. I suspect t
Hi,
You might want to try peak.utils.proxies [1] as an alternative for
zope.proxy. With some modifications it worked for me on Google App
Engine with most (but not all) of the the functionality needed by
zope.location. Also this link [2] may (or may not) be a good starting
point if you would like
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Baiju M wrote:
> Any idea how difficult it is to create optional C extensions
> for these packages:
zope.proxy will be fairly difficult to implement without C. Alternate
Python implementations may be able to use extensions written in other
ways, however. (Jav
Hi,
Any idea how difficult it is to create optional C extensions
for these packages:
zope.container
zope.hookable
zope.proxy
zope.security
I think for all other packages in ZTK has optional C extensions:
http://wiki.zope.org/bluebream/StatusOfWindowsBinaryPackages
Regards,
Baiju M
__
