Paul McNett wrote: > Tal Einat wrote: >> Still, having -too many- "magic" properties can be confusing. I would prefer >> getting to anything font-related through a Font property than directly, even >> if >> the functionality is the same. But, that's just me, and this is mostly a >> style >> issue. Still, since TIOOWTDI is considered Pythonic, this does seem somewhat >> un-Pythonic... > > FWIW, I have minor regrets flattening out the Font properties. This is > one of those things that I carried forward from what I was used to in > Visual FoxPro, and in retrospect for no very good reason. > > Now that FontBold, FontItalic, etc. are there, we won't consider > dropping them until Dabo 2.0, and they really don't cause harm... >
I can understand not dropping them till 2.0 - I am not commenting on that part. I think they do cause harm: confusion. I didn't even know the font object existed because I saw the "magic" first. using the magic will really hurt when it is time to migrate code to 2.0, which won't hurt if the font object is used. What I recommend is figuring out if the magic really is going to go away, and then add depreciation warnings to code that uses it. Also, I think the same syntax? should be applied to things that aren't currently magic, but have a similar pattern, like the grid header attributes. This might be doing magic in the other direction, bundling a bunch of attributes into something that looks like an object that really isn't an object. Maybe it makes sense to create a object? Carl K _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
