Hi Stephan,
Is these code all right?
Regards,
SimonOn 11/13/05, Simon Hang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Stephan,
Here is the test:(test_ramcache.py)
class TestStorage(TestCase):
def test_getEntry(self):
--snipped--
def test_getEntry_do_cleanup(self):
from zope.app.cach
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So using write() once doesn't at all seem like an advantage over simply
returning the data...
The interesting part is behind the scenes. If the response is large
enough (it's an adjustable threshold), the respon
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
page 204, Example 12.24, line 17: Using the ``write()`` method of
HTTP-based responses does not provide a performance advantage in
Zope X3 3.0 and 3.1 and is not supported anymore in Zope 3.2 and
higher.
I would like to point out
Actually, I just found another place where Python expressions are
handy. I have a simple but kindof specialized form - one that is too
simple and too specific to really go through the Zope schema system
without a lot of gnashing of teeth. It may be easier to do with
zope.formlib, but it's still not
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 11:22:56AM +0100, Alexander Limi wrote:
> This reminds me of a thing Steve Alexander and myself talked about when
> working together on a project using Zope 3 a while back:
>
> One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
> multiple attributes
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So using write() once doesn't at all seem like an advantage over simply
returning the data...
The interesting part is behind the scenes. If the response is large
enough (it's an adjustable threshold), the response transparently gets
sen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Shane Hathaway wrote:
So I fully agree that the original write() should go (in fact I suppose
it's gone already), but to say there was no performance advantage is
imprecise. I spent a fair amount of time making write() fast, with some
success.
Interesting. Wh
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>
>> page 204, Example 12.24, line 17: Using the ``write()`` method of
>> HTTP-based responses does not provide a performance advantage in
>> Zope X3 3.0 and 3.1 and is not supported anymore in Zope 3.2 and
>> higher.
>
>
> I would
Alexander Limi wrote at 2005-12-30 11:22 +0100:
> ...
>One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
>multiple attributes:
>
>
>
Why is this more ugly or error prone as your proposal?
> ...
>This provides the following benefits:
>
>- Easier to parse for XML tools (no s
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
page 204, Example 12.24, line 17: Using the ``write()`` method of
HTTP-based responses does not provide a performance advantage in
Zope X3 3.0 and 3.1 and is not supported anymore in Zope 3.2 and
higher.
I would like to point out that response.write() or
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 30. Dezember 2005 11:50:16 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Wasn't the
On 12/30/05, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wasn't the ZPT list considered obsolete some time ago?
No. The ZIP list is dead. I think there was a suggestion that the
ZPT list should be closed, but I disagreed with that since there are a
number of ZPT users outside of Zope, including us
--On 30. Dezember 2005 11:50:16 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Wasn't the ZPT list considered
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
When we refactored the Zope 3 pubisher to work more closely with WSGI,
we decided to remove the response.write method. We should have written
a proposal for this, but we failed to do so. Over the last few weeks
there has been much discussion
On 12/30/05, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - the TAL namespace had a limited and proper list of attributes. A
> very limited set of names that could be (theoretically) validated with
> standard XML tools.
This should probably remain a goal, but I don't think it's as big a
deal as the ord
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 15:40 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
>
> What I am saying: don't take away feature that are useful for a particular
> kind of coders and for a particular way of coding. Don't take away a feature
> _just_ to enforce a certain way to do programming.
+1 to Andreas.
-1 to the prop
On 12/29/05, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> in the picture. But there are still little situations where Python
> expressions are handy, especially on big-macro templates where there's
> not a backing view. I'm not advocating programming in page templates,
This points out where change is r
--On 30. Dezember 2005 08:22:18 -0700 Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The same would probably be relevant for tal:defines, something like:
- It looks nice! :)
That's relative.
It would call it: syntactic sugar.
-aj
pgpum1nYYWhKO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
On 12/30/05, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:49:46 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think it would be quite possible to do explicit key or attribute
> > lookup with TALES, e.g.:
> >
> > foo/attr:bar (for foo.bar)
> > foo/k
Alexander Limi wrote:
> This reminds me of a thing Steve Alexander and myself talked about when
> working together on a project using Zope 3 a while back:
>
> One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
> multiple attributes:
>
>
>
> etc.
>
> We looked at having a
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:49:46 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it would be quite possible to do explicit key or attribute
lookup with TALES, e.g.:
foo/attr:bar (for foo.bar)
foo/key:bar (for foo['bar'])
foo/item:1(for foo[1])
This reminds me of
Jim Fulton wrote:
> When we refactored the Zope 3 pubisher to work more closely with WSGI,
> we decided to remove the response.write method. We should have written
> a proposal for this, but we failed to do so. Over the last few weeks
> there has been much discussion of this in which I asserted m
23 matches
Mail list logo
