Thanks for the suggestions you have made. Any way we have just managed
to fix the failure by bringing the change we have made in the implicit
compare function in Acquisition to the Explicit comparison also.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:25 PM, ranjith kannikara
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:40 AM, ranjith kannikara
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> I hope the code for this assert (used in line "assert self.aq_base ==
>>>> self" ) is defined for zope and can be fixed with not so much effort.
>>>> Can any one suggest where why these different versions are showing two
>>>> Or the file or code segment that does this assertion .
>>> I don't know why there is a different result, but it's important to
>>> find out. Otherwise all sorts of assumptions might be broken! That
>>> said, it's in a module aqlegacy.py, I wonder what the purpose of that
>>> module is.
>> The module aqlegacy.py was added by philiKON and me and fakes Acquisition
>> support (by providing all required methods) for classes not inheriting from
>> Acquisition anymore.
>> This was part of the AQ vs. __parent__ merge. For example Five BrowserView's
>> don't inherit from any Acquistion base classes anymore, but for backwards
>> compatibility we still provide the methods (aq_parent, aq_inner, ...) on the
>> class, since lots of code out in the wild might use them.
> Hi Hanno,
> Thanks for your reply. We are still wandering in the code to get the
> reason of this failure of the 'assert' . We cant even figure out
> whether the cause for the failure is in the module Acquisition itself
> or not.
> Can you say whether the failure is in the module Acquisition??
> If not can you help us in figuring out the reason of this failure?
>> If the assert statement fails now, the actual cause needs to be investigated
>> and fixed.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -