Tres Seaver wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:

Tres Seaver wrote:

I will let Jim comment on your use case.

What use case? I missed it. Where is it?

Here is Stuart's original post:

This has the side effect of not passing the name attribute to
my security assertion methods registered via

class Foo(blah, blah, blah):
    security = ClassSecurityInfo()
    def _checkAccess(self, name, value):
        if name.startswith('CG'):
            return 1
        return 0

    def __getitem__(self, key):
        ''' Access via dictionary interface, with security
            provided via _checkAccess
        return 'example'

The old code allowed this example to work, because it passed 'name' when validating __getitem__ access.

OK, I can see that the code was using this. I still don't understand what the use case is. :)

I'm saying YAGNI to controlling access to mapping items based on keys.
I'd like to hear a convincing argument for why we need to support  this.
Saying that the old implementation did it that way is not convincing
to me.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that I can point to old implementation that
didn't pass the name for item access.


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714  
Zope Corporation

Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to