On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Steve Alexander wrote:
> > This is 2.3.0, I suppose I should try the new beta just for kicks...
>
> Yes, do try the new beta. If this is what I think it is, it is fixed in the latest
> 2.3, as I submitted the patch that fixed it :-)
>
> Are your objects traversed to through
R. David Murray wrote:
>
> And the expedition was a qualified success. It turns out that
> getObject has one of those nasty unadorned try: except: structures
> in it. It was masking an authorization error. The auth error
> is occuring in urestrictedTraverse, and the last lines of my traceback
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, R. David Murray wrote:
> Howevever, I'm still getting 'None' as the result. If I print out, say,
> catent.id, I see the correct ID for the object I'm trying to retrieve.
>
> It doesn't make sense that this is failing. I must be doing something
> stupid but I still can't se
On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Steve Alexander wrote:
> > "R. David Murray" wrote:
> >> catent.getobject()
> >>
> >> That would seem to be a lot more OOish.
>
> In 2.3 you can call catent.getObject(). You can pass an optional REQUEST
> in as an argument, to support lookup via resolve_url rather than
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Where did getobject come from? I know about Catalog.data, but I've never
| seen a getobject() method...
It's a method of the brain ;). If you have a data_record_id, you can
use getobject() to retrieve the object it represents.
What's wrong with AbstractCatalogBrain.getObject()? Doesn't that work?
-Randy
> -Original Message-
> From: Casey Duncan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 3:45 PM
> To: R. David Murray; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Ca
"R. David Murray" wrote:
>
> I'll probably figure this out as soon as I post like last time, but I've
> been staring at it and can't see my mistake. The following code returns
> a list of None's:
>
> objs = []
> for catent in container.Catalog(context.REQUEST):
> objs.append(container.Catalog
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "R. David Murray" wrote:
>> catent.getobject()
>>
>> That would seem to be a lot more OOish.
In 2.3 you can call catent.getObject(). You can pass an optional REQUEST
in as an argument, to support lookup via resolve_url rather than
restrictedTraverse.
--
Steve A
"R. David Murray" wrote:
> objs = []
> for catent in container.Catalog(context.REQUEST):
> objs.append(container.Catalog.getobject(catent.data_record_id_))
> return objs
>
> I've checked, and catent is a mybrains instance and catent.data_record_id_
> has an increasing number as its value. So w
