On 02/11/2013 11:00 AM, Ed Leafe wrote:
On Feb 11, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Paul McNett <[email protected]> wrote:
The rationale is simply that we were loading way too many things upon someone
issuing
'import dabo'. There's a class of users that use very specific things from the
framework inside their web applications, such as only using the biz and data
layer,
but no dApp and no UI, or only using the report writer and nothing else. Rather
than
importing everything everyone would possibly need in 'import dabo', we should
make
things available via explicit import via subpackages.
I think the question is more accurately phrased "what harm was there in
importing those things?"
Do you see performance improvements? Lower memory requirements?
I thought that namespaces were managed by dicts, and that they were all
pointers to each other, so having, say, dabo.dApp defined doesn't take up any
significant memory over not adding it to the namespace.
-- Ed Leafe
In answer to your questions:
None that I've seen.
No and No - not so far.
I have been doing a little testing and I don't see the difference yet.
I did have an issue running a Dabo app as a cron job and have not tested
that yet which might support Paul's suggested improvements - ease of use
for non-gui apps.
Johnf
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]
