+1 Excellent Change
+1 Minimal Backward Compatibility Difficulties
I think this would also help quite a bit with newbie adoption of Python.
I've had to explain this un-feature on numerous occassions and it given
how smart Python is, I've wondered why it has this requirement. If you
look in
Interesting discussion. I've been thinking the opposite; that I should
start using __attribute more often for undocumented, private member
variables that are implementation details and clearly not part of the
public interface.
I'm curious what people have against it?
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at
factory
inheriting from a StickyFactory) is that registry queries can be
done, to list sticky adapters and other bookkeeping chores.
Ok. That's it.
Cheers,
Clark
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research, LLC.
http
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 08:54:33PM -0500, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
| Since __conform__ and __adapt__
| would sprout two new arguments, it would make those writing adapters
| think a bit more about the kind of adapter that they are providing.
|
| Using optional arguments may not be the most
in this
thread and put into the PEP (mostly as appendix material); keep
posting good ideas, problems, opinions, whatever -- I will summarize
over this weekend.
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research, LLC.
http://www.prometheusresearch.com
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 04:39:00PM +, Armin Rigo wrote:
| I'm trying to reserve the usage of interface to something more
| concrete: the concrete ways we have to manipulate a given object
| (typically a set of methods including some unwritten expectations).
I'd say that a programmer
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 12:28:16PM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
| At 08:32 AM 1/14/05 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
| I have no desire to add syntax
| complexities like this to satisfy some kind of theoretically nice
| property.
|
| Whether it's syntax or a decorator, it allows you to create
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 10:02:39AM -0800, Michel Pelletier wrote:
| Phillip J. Eby wrote:
| The result is that you generate a simple adapter class whose
| only state is a read-only slot pointing to the adapted object,
| and descriptors that bind the registered implementations to that object.
anything just holler,
| including asking me privately about anything that might be unclear or
| ambiguous or whatever -- I'll be around all weekend except Sunday night
| (italian time -- afternoon US time;-).
Ok.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research, LLC
not be used (by default) in an automatic adapter construction.
Your thoughts?
Clark
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research, LLC.
http://www.prometheusresearch.com/
o office: +1.203.777.2550
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 08:08:43PM -0500, Bob Ippolito wrote:
| Ok. I think we have identified two sorts of restrictions on the
| sorts of adaptations one may want to have:
|
| `stateless' the adaptation may only provide a result which
|does not maintain its own state
|
|
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 11:50:37PM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
| 'lossless' isn't really a good term for non-noisy. The key is that a
| noisy adapter is one that alters the precision of the information it
| provides, by either claiming greater precision than is actually present,
| or by
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 10:16:14AM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
| But now, since I am still in favor of automatic combined adaptation
| *as a last resort*, I ask you to consider that Python is not C++, and
| that perhaps we can make the experience in Python better than it was
| in C++. Perhaps
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:07:37PM -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:
| A two-step adaptation encodes specific intention that it seems transitive
| adaption would be blind to.
Exactly. Nice example Ian. To parrot your example a bit more
concretely, the problem happens when you get two different
be nice if interfaces had a way to specify a test-suite that
could be run against a component which claims to be compliant. For
example, it could provide invalid inputs and assert that the proper
errors are returned, etc.
Best,
Clark
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research
is
the better choice for this particular case since it would enable
third-parties to register a wrapper.
Overall, I think both you and Alex are now proposing essentially
the same thing... no?
Best,
Clark
--
Clark C. Evans Prometheus Research, LLC
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 01:34:59PM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
| The performance penalty I was talking about was for using an abstract
| base class, in a subclass with a __conform__ method for conformance to
| other protocols. In this case, __conform__ will be uselessly called
| every time
17 matches
Mail list logo
