Sorry, probably I should have posted my first message in your developers list, but I want to add to this discussion...
Frankly I find it inconvenient to access settings in the applications using pattern like MY_SETTING.value I already have a lot of stuff like settings.MY_SETTING sprinkled here and there. Do you think it would be better to redesign the livesettings so that you have an object encapsulating all those settings and actual settings being the properties of the object (with getters that take values out of cache and setters saving new values and invalidating the cache)? What do you think? The other thing that could be simplified - registering new settings. Right now you have to call register_setting() function, which an object might be able to handle internally. Does this sound sensible? Thanks. askbotman. On Apr 27, 10:41 pm, Bruce Kroeze <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Evgeny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > MIN_REP_TO_VOTE = > > config_register(IntegerValue(REP_RULES,'MIN_REP_TO_VOTE', > > default=15,description=_('blah'))).value > > If I really wanted to inline like that, I'd make a utility function that > first checks to see if the passed XxxValue is already present in the > ConfigGroup. If not, then add it, and either way - return the current > value. > > -- > Bruce Kroezehttp://www.ecomsmith.com > It's time to hammer your site into shape. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Satchmo users" 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 > athttp://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Satchmo users" 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/satchmo-users?hl=en.
