On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:08:10 -0500, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With the previous PEP, people could create all sorts of subtle problems in > their code (with or without transitivity!) and have no direct indicator of > a problem. Clark and Ian made me realize this with their string/file/path > discussions -- *nobody* is safe from implicit adaptation if adaptation > actually creates new objects with independent state! An adapter's state > needs to be kept with the original object, or not at all, and most of the > time "not at all" is the correct answer.
+1, specially for the last sentence. An adapter with local state is not an adapter anymore! It's funny how difficult it's to get this... but it's obvious once stated. -- Carlos Ribeiro Consultoria em Projetos blog: http://rascunhosrotos.blogspot.com blog: http://pythonnotes.blogspot.com mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
