On 2005-05-20, Cees Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well how about this for a radical proposal... Lets drop positioning > completely from the first version! If it is not there, then it will > be easy to alter later. I think once we have a system where people > can actually start using the callbacks, we will see the requirements a > lot quicker and be able to deal with them appropriately when we have a > better (clearer) understanding of the problem space. > > We still need to be consistent in the execution so that it is > repeatable, but we can use a simple fifo system where the first > callback registered is the first to be executed. Some control can > still be had in the execution order by reordering the loading of > plugins or registering of callbacks and such... > > What is important to me right now is to have a system of callbacks > that can be registered at the class level and at the object level. > Ordering is not that important to me right now, and won't be until we > have a lot of plugins that use the callbacks system. If a user uses > the callbacks without using any of the plugins, then they control > exactly when all the callbacks get registered, so ordering is not > important there. It only comes into play when using third party > plugins, and even then we may find that it is a solvable problem > without resorting to strict positioning of callbacks.
Cees++ I do feel there is a consensus that callbacks are desirable, and registering them at the class and object level is desirable as well. That seems very reasonable to move forward with as a first step. Cees, do you want to take what you like best of your patch and the other refinements to it and craft them into a new proposal-as-code? Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
