On Mar 17, 2005, at 10:20 AM, Ioan Coman wrote:

>
>> I'm a little worried about the clarity of
>> the 'has_info' question, (with or without your other change).
>> I think adding the items container doesn't make this clearer,
>> since some 'info' may also come from other session attributes,
>> not involved in __setitem__ calls.
>
> I don't know too much about purpose of has_info & is_dirty,
> but when we store something into session for later use we have info.
>

Maybe has_info() is really the wrong name here.  The way Quixote uses
it,
maybe the name should be is_worth_storing().  Applications may not wish
to
store sessions with certain combinations of 'info'.