Hi Bryan, > Unless there are more cases of observers on stamps observing attributes > on ContentItem, I think it'd be better to put the overhead of checking > for stampedness in the individual observer, to avoid adding overhead to > all notifications. > > (Also, wouldn't checking stampedness in the dispatch mechanism prevent > you from getting notified when an EventStamp'd item is unstamped, and > removed from collections as a result?)
At the moment there appears to be only one other observer of a ContentItem attribute, in the script module. But since Script is a new kind, not a stamp, its observer on ContentItem.body behaves the way I was expecting EventStamp's observer to, it only gets called when Scripts are changed. I think you're right that observers may want to pay attention to unstamp-related collection changes. All in all, you've convinced me this isn't a good idea, we should just be careful with observer methods and not assume (like I erroneously did) that the method will only be called on items that have that stamp. Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
