Jim Fulton wrote:
I don't inderstand what motivated the special expression types for this
namespace. For example, to get at file-system based code, couldn't you
have used the modules variable?
I started there, but went with the special expression types because the
set of "things" that are valid
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I thought you had proposed this, but I couldn't find a proposal
or documentation.
You say this is implemented in Zope 2? Where is it documented?
Actually, it's only implemented on evan-pathprefix-branch. It has been
quite a while since I had a chance to work
Jim Fulton wrote:
I thought you had proposed this, but I couldn't find a proposal
or documentation.
You say this is implemented in Zope 2? Where is it documented?
Actually, it's only implemented on evan-pathprefix-branch. It has been
quite a while since I had a chance to work on it, so I had forg
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I've posted two proposals:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/TALESPathExpressionAdapters
Proposes a mechanism for easily using adapters in TALES expressions.
I'm not at all clear on how the proposed mechanism is superior to the
implementation of path segment prefix
Jim Fulton wrote:
I've posted two proposals:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/TALESPathExpressionAdapters
Proposes a mechanism for easily using adapters in TALES expressions.
I'm not at all clear on how the proposed mechanism is superior to the
implementation of path segment prefixes that exists in Zop
Jim Fulton wrote:
I've posted two proposals:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/TALESPathExpressionAdapters
Not much opinion. Though I fear that "(adapter)object" could lead to
this syntax in Python itself, which would be horrid ;) I agree that
adapter(object) is a bad direction. object*adapter looks
