Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Clearly, it could. But that's not the way we went. Changing it now would
> be really damaging, and I'm not sure what would be gained.
>
> I can imagine use cases where getting a new instance each time would be
> useful.
But that is under the full controll of the __call__ of
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> For the record, I normally use the singleton analogy to explain unnamed
> global utilities. Perhaps that's bad, though I find it works pretty
> well. It'd probably be more accurate to use the terms you did, an
> "extension of the singleton principle", but as you say, it ju
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>
>
>> You're saying that:
>>
>> import zope.interface.Interface
>>
>> class IFoo(zope.interface.Interface):
>> ...
>>
>> is better than:
>>
>> from zope.interface import Interface
>>
>> class IFoo(Int
Hello,
while trying to install zope.location (3.4.0) and zope.security (3.5.2)
from source
(in order to create a NetBSD-pkgsrc package) I noticed, that they specify
each other in their install-requires list in setup.py.
Looking at the code, they also import each other:
> zope/location/location
