From: "Max M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sorry but I don't see that. How on earth are you suposed to add an
> object to an objectmanager, if you don't use _setObject() ??
You use another method that in turn calls _setObject.
Now you may argue that there should be a public method that does the same,
but that is strictly another question.
> Every time you make an object that subclasses ObjectManager, wich is
> often, you need to use that function. That can hardly be called private.
It depends on what you define as "private". I have never seen the use of
shielding a method from future subclasses of a class. It only causes
problems and unessecary restrictions. For me, private means that you shield
it from use outside of the object, not from your subclasses.
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -