On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 07:42:29 -0400, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Toby Dickenson wrote:
>>
>> >I'm not sure exactly what problem you are refering to. It sound's
>> >like an issue of depending on a specific acquired name and having
>> >the name overridden with something bogus. Is that it?
>>
>> There are two related issues that conspire to make the problem hard:
>>
>> A. What you descibe above, that looks like it will be fixed in part
>> by NO_SUBOBJECTS_OVERRIDE (which looks great). The outstanding
>> issue is what happens when a new version of a product wants to
>> add a new NO_SUBOBJECTS_OVERRIDE name (when objects of that
>> name may already exist in old subobjects).
>
>I think that there should be some discussion of this design
>pattern. Specifically, I'm not sure I like the idea of an application
>that depends on fixed names in a hierarchy. In fact, I know I
>don't. :)
The technique isnt nice, but its hardly unconventional. the REQUEST
object (as in self.REQUEST) is a good example.
>*I* would like to see this discussion happen in a Wiki,
>but I won't insist. :) FWIW, it will be much more likely
>for me to make comments in a wiki, especially if someone
>sends me the wiki link when they are ready for comments.
I start something later this week.
Toby Dickenson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
