On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 02:47:01AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Who knows. I'd rather be safe. It's not that hard.
> In any case, we would have needed the fix to handle old pickles
> correctly.
Asking a possibly redundant question... not being much of a ZODB
hacker, I didn't follow this thread
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 05:21:55AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> >Woot! ;-) Descriptors, yum...
>
> But you can use descriptors in extension classes now too.
I wondered what the heck you guys were on about...
google turned up this:
http://users.rcn.com/python/download/Descr
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 05:21, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> > Woot! ;-) Descriptors, yum...
>
> But you can use descriptors in extension classes now too.
> Extension classes are now just new-style classes with some
> extra features and a different mro algorithm.
Whoa. Cool. That
Chris McDonough wrote:
Woot! ;-) Descriptors, yum...
But you can use descriptors in extension classes now too.
Extension classes are now just new-style classes with some
extra features and a different mro algorithm.
Jim
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 10:02, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 08:1
Woot! ;-) Descriptors, yum...
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 10:02, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 08:15, Chris McDonough wrote:
> > Can you answer a question about the features we're allowed now? If we
> > don't use extensionclass, is it possible to persist instances of
> > new-style class
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 08:15, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Can you answer a question about the features we're allowed now? If we
> don't use extensionclass, is it possible to persist instances of
> new-style classes in ZODB now (ie. is persistent.Persistent really a
> new-style type/class)?
Yes. (i.e
> On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 02:39, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
> > I checked in the necessary fix for PersistentMapping. There was a
> > change in the data structure and I had to add some logic to convert
> > some old state.
Oh, geez, I remember this setstate/getstate business now. FWIW, I think
Jeremy add
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 02:39, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I checked in the necessary fix for PersistentMapping. There was a
> change in the data structure and I had to add some logic to convert
> some old state.
>
> I also had to check in a %$#@ travesty because Data.fs.in still has
> references to BoboP
On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 02:47, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> ...
>
> > Out of curiosity, could you explain why it matters in this context
> > whether it's an extensionclass or not? Is it because there might be a
> > set of people using PersistentMapping objects for whom its important
Chris McDonough wrote:
...
Out of curiosity, could you explain why it matters in this context
whether it's an extensionclass or not? Is it because there might be a
set of people using PersistentMapping objects for whom its important
that they be able to use extenionclass semantics against them? I
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 23:02, Chris McDonough wrote:
Here's an idea: create a simple script that manufactured a module which
set up the Zope configuration, "filled in" for BTree in sys.modules, and
got a hold of Zope.app(), causing ZGlobals to be replaced by a new-style
BTree
On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 23:02, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Here's an idea: create a simple script that manufactured a module which
> set up the Zope configuration, "filled in" for BTree in sys.modules, and
> got a hold of Zope.app(), causing ZGlobals to be replaced by a new-style
> BTree due to the abov
On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> > I think this problem is actually easier to solve in the common case than
> > requring that people run a conversion script. The ZGlobals data
> > structure is a cache, and can be blown away and recreated
> > indiscriminatel
Chris McDonough wrote:
I think this problem is actually easier to solve in the common case than
requring that people run a conversion script. The ZGlobals data
structure is a cache, and can be blown away and recreated
indiscriminately. It's recreated whenever a Product is added or
removed, and Zo
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
/me grumbles
Why grumble, the problem may be easier than we thought!
Is it right that in general the only old-style BTree in a ZODB is
'ZGlobals' at the root?
I dunno. Maybe. :)
> It seems ZCatalog have a manage_convertBTrees
method since 2.3.1, and at least on my instance,
15 matches
Mail list logo
