the question was wether DateTime instances (of the new implementation,
which is yet to be coded) should mixin Persistent.
regards, juergen herrmann
[ Tim Peters wrote:]
> Sorry, I couldn't find a comprehensible question here after reasonable
> effort to extract one. Clearly, Zope2's DateTime.DateTime.DateTime
> are neither persistent nor do they define any mutating methods. Are those
> relevant? If not, try to ask a question directly, without assuming
> has read the other 55 messages in the zope-dev thread ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:03 PM
> To: Lennart Regebro
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [ZODB-Dev] Re: [Zope] DateTime mess
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On 11/29/05, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Hmm... how so? I've always thought it quite nice that when, for example,
>>>you store the modification time of an object in a DateTime, you can
>>>safely update it without worrying about the whole object having to be
>>>repickled when you change it...
>> Oh, so that make a difference? datetime objects are unchangeable,
> Really? didn't know that...
>> everytime you change it you will have to set the attribute, and I
>> thought the whole object got pickled then, but I guess that it
>> doesn't, then.
> Honestly, I don't know. Changing to the zodb-dev list so someone who
> does might comment...
> Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
> - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
> For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
> ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org
>> XLhost.de - eXperts in Linux hosting <<
Bruderwöhrdstraße 15b, DE-93051 Regensburg
Fon: +49 (0)700 XLHOSTDE [0700 95467833]
Fax: +49 (0)721 151 463027
For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:
ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org