[ZCM] [ZC] 1074/ 5 Assign "Cant declare classes in Scripts with 2.7 and Python 2.3"

[Collector: Zope Bugs, Features, and Patches ...]

Issue #1074 Update (Assign) "Cant declare classes in Scripts with 2.7 and Python 2.3"
 Status Accepted, Zope/bug medium
To followup, visit:
  http://collector.zope.org/Zope/1074

==============================================================
= Assign - Entry #5 by evan on Jan 6, 2004 4:46 pm

 Status: Resolved => Accepted

 Supporters added: evan

Setting __name__ to the Id of the Script, my original "fix", fails if the Id contains a period ('.').  This causes wacky import problems, which leads to hair-tearingly opaque security problems.

Solution #1: Omit or replace periods in the __name__

Solution #2: Set the __name__ to None

Solution #Inf: Get this fixed in Python 2.3.4

I actually like #2 the best, since it is immune to weird Script names and produces class repr's that look like "<class ?.foo at 0x41696bfc>"
________________________________________
= Resolve - Entry #4 by evan on Nov 4, 2003 2:46 pm

 Status: Pending => Resolved

Fixed in HEAD and 2.7 branch.
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #3 by leper on Oct 7, 2003 11:00 pm

Yeah, defining it does fix the bug for script objects, but what 
should __name__ in the globals dict be defined as?
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #2 by tim_one on Oct 6, 2003 10:03 am

On zope-dev, Fred L. Drake, Jr. said:

"""
In Python 2.3.x, when a class is defined the __name__ of the
encompassing module is looked up.  I suspect Python Scripts can be
fixed by defining __name__ in the globals dictionary in which the code is executed.
"""
________________________________________
= Request - Entry #1 by mcdonc on Oct 5, 2003 10:15 am

Jamie Heilman reports:

In 2.3 you can no longer declare new classes in a Script object.  It
> bitches about a lack of __name__ attribute.  I haven't really had the
> time to look into it closely, but it does effect the examples shipped
> with zope, and actually its just a very useful thing to be able to do.
> Whatever this problem stems from, there will probably be more because
> of it.
==============================================================