Thanks for the tip about post-action-redirect. It does exist, and it
works!

I would be interested in the discussion about weblocks/elephant.

Yarek

On Dec 24, 7:59 pm, Ian Eslick <[email protected]> wrote:
> The action is dynamically wrapped by a with-transaction statement.  As  
> Stephen says, the elephant transaction mechanism is not entirely  
> compatible with the assumptions in it.  The with-transaction macro  
> presumes that a non-local exit is an abort and so aborts the entire  
> action transaction.  I'm not certain it's still in dev, but I use a  
> post-action-redirect which simply adds a post-action hook to the  
> request hook that calls the redirect function after the transaction  
> has committed.
>
> Perhaps at some point we can revisit some of the Elephant store hacks  
> I had to implement to make it work with Weblocks assumptions about  
> persistent objects and see if there is a way to upgrade the Weblocks  
> built-in functionality to subsume/support all the various models.
>
> Ian
>
> On Dec 24, 2008, at 8:30 PM, Stephen Compall wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yarek Kowalik <[email protected]> writes:
> >> The problem is that somehow 'redirect' causes the delete of the
> >> elephant object to fail, as if the elephant transaction was canceled
> >> (how do I check that this is indeed so?). Visually, the user is  
> >> simply
> >> not logged out.   Now, if I comment out the redirect, and do simply a
> >> mark-dirty on the containing widget, the user is properly logged out
> >> of site.
>
> > Elephant's elephant-transaction-hook doesn't reproduce all of the
> > functionality allowed by store API and implemented in `action-txn-
> > hook'.
>
> > This is why we haven't replaced the trio of transaction GFs with a
> > dynamic-wind one: it would preclude cross-store features like the ones
> > implemented by action-txn-hook.  As I understand it, Elephant doesn't
> > export sufficient functionality to implement the trio.
>
> > --
> > I write stuff athttp://failex.blogspot.com/now.  But the post
> > formatter and themes are terrible for sharing code, the primary
> > content, so it might go away sooner or later.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to