Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sherm Pendley a écrit : > >> It's a stylistic thing, nothing more. > > A bit more than just 'stylistic' IMHO. It's a matter of > convenience. Having to manage hundreds of files each with a dozen > lines of code is a PITA.
Yes, but the pain in that case comes from having hundreds of trivial classes, not from the way in which the source for them is organized. > Having to retype the same import statements > in hundreds of files is a PITA - and a good way to waste time and > forget something when one has to fix these import statements (yes, > even with the appropriate tediting tools). I wouldn't call such > considerations "nothing more than stylistic". Neither would I. But then, I would describe the existence of all those files as just the symptom - the real problem being the design that needs all of those hundreds of trivial classes in the first place. Granted, I know very little of Python. It may be the case that Python encourages the use of hundreds of "little classes" - and if that is the case, then I agree, storing each one in its own file would be rather absurd. I'm more accustomed to writing classes that tend to be larger - hundreds if not thousands of lines each, or more - and in that case, storing them one per file is a reasonable way to organize one's sources. sherm-- -- Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
