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 > > that they be able to use extenionclass semantics against them? I'd just > > never thought of using __of__ or inheritedAttribute or any of the other > > EC-specific stuff on a PersistentMapping. > > <shrug> 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.
Gotcha. 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)? - C _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )