Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
> > Fernando Correa Neto wrote:
> >> Adding new template engines to BFG require you to know python while in
> >> GROK, it'd require you to grok grok first (which in would then
> >> introduce the developer to ZCA) which is definitely a Zope3 thing.
> > You hit on a point that I consider important. One of the interesting
> > things about ZCML (and hence BFG) is it's easy for any Python developer
> > to write their own directives. ZCML doesn't violate DRY, as I once
> > thought it did, because if you find yourself writing repetitive
> > directives, you can just create a custom directive in Python instead.
> > Unfortunately, Grok obscures that simplicity. It seems much harder to
> > add new kinds of decorators than it is to add new kinds of ZCML directives.
> You're sure about that? I find it easier to write a new grokker (whether
> for a decorator or a more generic class grokker that looks for a base
> class) than a new ZCML directive (and I've done plenty of both).
Approaching this from another point of view: debugging a grokker that
does not behave as you expect is much harder than debugging a zcml
statement or a python imperative statement.
Wichert Akkerman <wich...@wiggy.net> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
Repoze-dev mailing list