Re: [Zope-dev] is an object in a folder
Am Di, den 24.08.2004 schrieb Florent Guillaume um 17:48:
from Acquisition import aq_base
...
def hasObject(self, id):
Test if an object is in the current object.
if hasattr(aq_base(self), id):
return 1
return 0
It would be nice and faster but it doesn't work for non-subobjects
attributes. For instance your hasObject('meta_type') or
hasObject('isPrincipiaFolderish') would return true.
Isn't that what objectIds() is for?
return id in self.objectIds()
Christian
--
Christian Theune [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gocept gmbh co. kg
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] is an object in a folder
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 08:29:19AM +0200, Christian Theune wrote:
Am Di, den 24.08.2004 schrieb Florent Guillaume um 17:48:
from Acquisition import aq_base
...
def hasObject(self, id):
Test if an object is in the current object.
if hasattr(aq_base(self), id):
return 1
return 0
It would be nice and faster but it doesn't work for non-subobjects
attributes. For instance your hasObject('meta_type') or
hasObject('isPrincipiaFolderish') would return true.
Isn't that what objectIds() is for?
return id in self.objectIds()
Object might contain lots of subobjects. Returned list might be very
big.
--
Maciej Pietrzak
jid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] APE leaving SQL transactions open
Hi Shane, we have a PostgreSQL DA object in place, but we are not using it in our tests. Hope this helps. Best regards. Paolo One thing I wonder, though, is whether you're simultaneously connecting to Postgres using a Zope database adapter. It shouldn't matter, but who knows, maybe it does. Shane -- Paolo Bizzarri - President - Icube S.r.l. Address:Via Ridolfi 15 - 56124 Pisa (PI), Italy E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web:http://www.icube.it Phone: (+39) 050 97 02 07 Fax:(+39) 050 31 36 588 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Protected session items?
In TransientObject __guarded_setitem__ is just set to __setitem__. This means, that everything you set in the session dictionary is changeable through user code. Is there a good reason for this? I think it would be nice if I could set secret things in the session, mainly authentication information. If i do this currently, any user code can change it, which isn't exactly safe. REQUEST.SESSION['__ac_username'] = 'root' Ooops! :) This change: def __guarded_setitem__(self, k, v): if k[0] == '_': raise SomeThingOrAnotherError self.__setitem__(k, v) Fixes that. Then you can only set it from protected code. Is there some reason why this is NOT a good idea? //Lennart ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: is an object in a folder
Why not: def hasObject(self, id): Test if an object is in the current object. return id in self.objectIds() Suresh Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd like to add a method like def hasObject(self, id): Test if an object is in the current object. for o in self._objects: if o['id'] == id: return 1 return 0 to ObjectManager. This would bring it in line with BTreeFolder2 (who already has an hasObject method) and we could then always use the most efficient method to test if a folder has a given subobject id. Opinions ? Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Protected session items?
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 11:06, Lennart Regebro wrote:
In TransientObject __guarded_setitem__ is just set to __setitem__.
This means, that everything you set in the session dictionary is
changeable through user code. Is there a good reason for this?
I don't think __guarded_setitem__ is at fault.
I think it would be nice if I could set secret things in the session,
mainly authentication information. If i do this currently, any user code
can change it, which isn't exactly safe.
REQUEST.SESSION['__ac_username'] = 'root'
Ooops! :)
REQUEST.SESSION.set('__ac_username', 'root')
Nothing magic about __guarded_setitem__ unfortunately.
For this particular case maybe just don't trust __ac_username in the
session; just put the credentials in the session as __ac and do what
CookieCrumbler does (set REQUEST._auth, and so on) on each request from
trusted code. Then it becomes exactly as safe as basic auth or cookie
auth wrt risk of identity change.
I agree though that it would be nice to be able to have a kind of
session where the ability to write anything into it could be restricted
by a permission.
This change:
def __guarded_setitem__(self, k, v):
if k[0] == '_':
raise SomeThingOrAnotherError
self.__setitem__(k, v)
Fixes that. Then you can only set it from protected code.
Is there some reason why this is NOT a good idea?
Since nobody does attribute access with a session
(SESSION.__ac_username), they always do SESSION['__ac_username'], or
SESSION.get('__ac_username'), it's even more magical than usual in the
Zope sense. The session was always meant to act almost exactly like a
dictionary and not like a typical persistent SimpleItem-based Zope
object.
I suspect that the problem of providing authorized session data access
can be solved using permissions and place instead of baking the
underscore hack in (a separate session data manager and/or transient
object container could be used to provide this kind of session and it
could be put in a separate place). Too bad I didn't anticipate this in
TransientObject and protect the setting methods with some permission
(they're all public now). But maybe a subclass or alternate
implementation could do that?
- C
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
