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 <>    It is simple to make things.                   It is hard to make things simple.
Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to