On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Christopher Arndt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jorge Vargas schrieb: > > > about the adaptations I got some ideas, why don't we work on some more > > methods that will provide a much better adaptation some ideas I have > > on my mind are. > > User.belongs_to(group) > > user in group.users > > > Group.has_User(user) > > group in user.groups > > > User.can_do(permission) > > for group in user.groups: > if permission in group.permissions: > return True > yes I know about those but as you may know they are a bit inheficient as they have to load many objects into memory, the methods I'm suggesting will be more efficient creating exact queries.
> But the last one is IMO better solved in a higher authority layer, so > that you can abstract thinks like > > if identity.is_anonymous: > groups = [Group.query().get_by(group_name='anonymous').one()] > else: > groups = identity.groups + \ > [Group.query().get_by(group_name='authenticated').one()] > yes that's true but I still believe we could get a specific permission because sometimes it's nice to just ask "if user can do permission" even if in the back it's going thru the group it's a nice idiom. > for group in groups: > if permission in group.permissions: > return True > > Also: > > Group.users > Group.by_group_name() #* > Permission.by_permission_name() #* > > * Should we also provide User.by_name(), Group.by_name() and > Permission.by_name() as aliases? > > Chris > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
