On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:11:59AM +0100, Michael Hanselmann wrote: > Am 1. März 2011 15:58 schrieb Iustin Pop <[email protected]>: > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 02:07:25PM +0100, Michael Hanselmann wrote: > >> If you > >> don't want the jobs to be submitted directly from the opcode, how > >> about returning a list of opcodes from Exec? > >> > >> If they're stored in a recognizable (as in isinstance()) container > >> class, mcpu.Processor or a wrapper function can submit them. > > > > That's also fine. Note we already have dry_run_result as a "side-effect" > > (why you call it that I'm not sure). > > I didn't even know about “dry_run_result”. What I mean with > “side-effects” in this case is when an object's function is called and > the direct return value is dropped, but the caller then looks at some > object attribute. The function had side-effects on the object. It > can't be always avoided (in Python), but one can at least try.
I just pointed out that it wasn't clear to me to which side-effects you were referring. > Will resend the design after some updates. Ok. iustin
