On 10/23/07, Laurence Rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> > Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> >> Log message for revision 80945:
> >> Moved two implements declarations from Five into the proper classes.
> > I object to this change. HTTPRequest does not really fulfil the
> > IBrowserRequest interface, and ObjectManager isn't a real IContainer
> > either. I understand that somebody made a mistake when they declared
> > them as such in the early days of Five. This is the reason we can't take
> > it back. But, at least as a sign of the fact that they're not (yet) the
> > real deal, this declaration has remained in ZCML.
> > A sensible step forward would be to make HTTPRequest a full
> > IBrowserRequest (we're getting there). As for ObjectManager, I think
> > IContainer implies a couple of semantics (such as unicode names, the
> > sending of events, etc.) that we should look closer at before deciding.
> I've found the fact that ObjectManager implements IContainer to be a
> problem in my application where I have a mixin implementing then
> ObjectManager expectations by adapting to IContainer (this allows most
> of my code to be zope 3 like with the zope 2 compatibility contained).
> I've had to subclass IContainer and adapt to my subclass instead.
> The only place I've run into problems using unicode names is in the
> ZCatalog (or maybe CatalogTool) where there is a test that a name
> isinstance str.
I guess we need to either actually implement the relevant interfaces,
or split the interfaces into something that can be implemented...
Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting.
+33 661 58 14 64
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -