Hi there,
It is my understanding that the ZTK is primarily to adopt proven
solutions that arise from our community that we intend to be shared by
this community. I'll also note that Martian is already in use in
combination with Bluebream, Zope 2 and Grok.
With that, I was thinking, concerning
Am 21.03.2011, 20:33 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver :
> FWIW, I just added 'queryAdapterFactory' and 'queryMultiAdapterFactory'
> APIs to zope.component on a branch:
> http://svn.zope.org/zope.component/branches/tseaver-queryAdapterFactory/
> These APIs make the "almost never overridden" / dependency
On Monday, March 21, 2011, Tres Seaver wrote:
> FWIW, I just added 'queryAdapterFactory' and 'queryMultiAdapterFactory'
> APIs to zope.component on a branch:
>
> http://svn.zope.org/zope.component/branches/tseaver-queryAdapterFactory/
Looks good to me. Incidentally, I was just needing this toda
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/21/2011 02:13 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> ...
>>> It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that
>>> registration
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 14:13 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> ...
> >> It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that
> >> registration is done on import time, while sca
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
...
>> It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that
>> registration is done on import time, while scanning separates the
>> registration from the definition. I'm no
On 03/21/2011 10:59 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> It's easy and clear, but has the drawback of encouraging that
>> registration is done on import time, while scanning separates the
>> registration from the definition. I'm not sure how impo
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 15:53 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 15:28, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > This might be OK for @implements and maybe @adapts, which describe
> > behavior, but start feeling wonky to me for something like: @utility.
>
> Well, the wonkyness comes from @utility
On 03/21/2011 04:08 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Martijn Faassen
> wrote:
>> On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :)
>>
>> In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for this kind
>> o
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Martijn Faassen
wrote:
> On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :)
>
> In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for this kind
> of configuration. Since that is subclassing, it impli
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 15:28, Jim Fulton wrote:
> This might be OK for @implements and maybe @adapts, which describe
> behavior, but start feeling wonky to me for something like: @utility.
Well, the wonkyness comes from @utility *not* being inherited, while
@implements would be. That could be co
On 03/21/2011 03:28 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :)
In Django and sqlalchemy declarative a meta class is used for this kind
of configuration. Since that is subclassing, it implies inheritance, I
think.
Of course metaclasses are not very goo
On 03/21/2011 03:07 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so
>> it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with no
>> implicit fallback to default values whatsoeve
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen wrote:
...
> With martian, the registration is then done by the grokking process,
> but I think decorators would be a process that is more acceptable to
> the Python world in general. Instanc
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so
> it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with no
> implicit fallback to default values whatsoever. Martian supports that
> scenario right now.
Sure
Hi there,
For Martian, Python 3 support is mostly an issue of making class
directives work as class decorators.
I'm not sure what Lennart means by point 1.
Anyway, Grok's configuration is dependent on the rules you give it, so
it's possible to have a completely explicit set of directives with
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
...
> 4. zope.interface already does, and zope.component will as well, once
> it's ported. That means we get things like:
>
> class IMyFace(Interface):
> whatevah
>
> class IMyFeet(Interface):
> something
>
> @implementer(IMyFace)
> cla
Also, the decorators will always return the original component,
meaning they can easily be used as post-config:
@adapter(IMyFace, IMyFeet)
class FootInMouth(object):
...
Will mark the class as an adapter, but not register it.
@adapt(IMyFace, IMyFeet)
class FootInMouth(object):
...
Will
18 matches
Mail list logo
