On Feb 9, 6:10 am, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2. The work makes it possible to reduce pickleshareDB to its essence. It's ironic that all the recent caching work has added essentially nothing to Leo's caching capabilities. However, I am quite pleased with the work, for several reasons: 1. The cacher class cleaned up Leo's core considerably. It is now possible to change the caching scheme without altering any file except leoCache.py. This file encapsulates all implementation details, and perhaps more importantly, all policy questions. We can now change caching policy easily, if we choose. 2. It is now completely clear what the PickleshareDB class does, how it works, and what it depends on. If fact, this class no longer depends on anything. Today's work moved the top-level functions into the pickleshare class. These were formerly in the path class--now they have names starting with an underscore to emphasize that they are internal helpers. So, were these three or four days work worthwhile? I think so. Sometimes its essential to pay attention to packaging issues. In the long run, this work will have advantages. The code is clear. I'll be able to understand it at any time. The code is self contained and properly packaged. Gone are all unwelcome dependencies between the code and any other package. Most importantly, the code is simple enough to become the basis for future work. Finally, the unit tests for this code are now run automatically with all the other unit tests in unitTest.leo. In short, I don't regret this work in the slightest. It was worth delaying rc1 to do it. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
