Dieter Maurer wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote at 2004-1-15 10:03 -0500:

Right. The name attribute was intended for attribute-based access.

IMO, it makes no sense to consider key values when doing security

I will let Jim comment on your use case.

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

allows integers, strings, dictionary mapping names to integers
and function with signature "name,value --> boolean" as

The motivation is that some attributes may be accessible
while others should not. It is highly likely that
this decision is based on the attribute name.
When "None" is passed as name, you loose...

None should never be passed for attribute accesses. If it is, then there is a bug. The case of dictionary mapping names to whatever is for attribute access. We are talking about item/key access. I haven't seen a use case for needing to specify separate access for separate key values.

BTW, telling me that an algorithm has changed doesn't constitute
a use case. :) I know that algorithm has changed.  I assert that
we don't need the feature that the change broke.  I am open
to evidence to the contrary.


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