Em Domingo 23 Abril 2006 14:16, Alberto Valverde escreveu: > I agree. At least in the jsonify case a "jsonify_explicit" function > is added to operate on objects the have a __json__ method, therefore > allowing both approaches: Add a rule to jsonify or provide a __json__ > method in your objects.
This is good design. :-) We should follow this in other parts of the code. > Unfortunately, I cannot think of a way to offer this flexibility in > other "generic"alized parts of TG like errorhandling.py or the new > "expose" (which I admit not understanding yet how it actually works > or what advantages it offers :/). Can't we adopt the same approach for these? How to do it is a bit beyond my abilities with generics right now, but I believe Simon can lend us a hand ;-) At least we have the possibility to access each implementation separately, doesn't we? So I can still write "ifs" in my code and call each one, can't I? :-) This would allow "me" to write the __json__ method and do the "ifs" myself... :-) > On the other hand, error_handler() doesn't need generic function > awareness in it's simplest and most common cases, only when doing > something fancy which in that case you can provide an optional "rule" > parameter. "Make simple things simple and complex things possible." But then, this goes against the Zen of Python: "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.". So, I got stuck here :-) > Mmm, cheese... ;) How was the race? :-) -- Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to turbogears@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
