Chris McDonough wrote:
sessionmanager.SessionData.a
...or something similar?
Yes. That's what Bob S. suggested. What are the benefits of this?
More graceful code that's more 'pythonesque' in Python Scripts:
if sessionmanager.SessionData.a['mykey'] == 1: ...as opposed to... if sessionmanager.SessionData.get('a')['mykey'] == 1:
The current way is: if sessiondatamanager.getSessionData()['mykey'] == 1: .. do something... I suppose you'd rather see: if sessiondatamanager.getSessionData().mykey == 1: .. do something... Is this really worth it?
sessionmanager.SessionData.b = 1 ...as opposed to... if sessionmanager.SessionData.set('b',1)
And this is currently: sessiondatamanager.getSessionData().set('b',1) You can't do assignment in DTML, and session-tracking needs to be usable from DTML, so the "ob.attr = val" idiom is out from the get-go. Another assumption I'm making is that "there should only be one way to do it". I'd rather not have both __setattr__ and .set work for session data objects, because it's confusing and doesn't buy anything at all other than a couple keystrokes.