Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 06:25:53PM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| ...
| >Sounds good to me. By quickly looking Zope 3's requests have mostly
| >the same methods and features from Zope2's. However sems like most
| >methods were renamed for consistency (eg: supports_retry ->
| >supportsRetry).
| | There are a number of things I can think of off the top of my head: | | - getting request-based URLs. For example request/URL/1 vs request/URL1

Uh, Zope 3 has the first I guess?

Yup.  These should be easy enough to combine.


| >The greatest lacking functionality in Zope 3 seems to be the lack of a
| >'lazy' namespace, which is used primariliy for the 'SESSION' object in
| >Zope 2. How do people feel about adding that to Zope 3?
| | I'm not familar with this. Where is it documented?

Here's what is in the docstring for HTTPRequest:

      - Lazy Data

        These are callables which are deferred until explicitly
        referenced, at which point they are resolved and stored as
        application data.

Haven't found much else documentation.

Are these basically lazy computed request keys/attributes then?

There's a 'set_lazy' method in HTTPRequest, and that's what the
session machinery uses to bind 'getSessionData' as 'SESSION'. This
specific case sucks though, because as 'SESSION' appears when doing
request.keys() is pretty common to create sessions implicitly by
iterating through the request.

Yeah, explicit is better than implicit.

I don't want to add this to Z3, but it should be included in the
new combined z2/z3 request.  We really need to take a look at the
combined API and decide what we want in the long run.


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714  
Zope Corporation
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to