Thanks for the good advice! Jim's comment about being explicit about the actor (in this case, my service wrapper) resonated with me, so I'm leaning towards:
rest_service.store(my_object) The soundcloud thing is still around, just at a different URL ( https://github.com/soundcloud/python-api-wrapper) that the one linked by Alex Martelli. It's a pretty good example, probably worth spending some time reading. Thanks! - Chris On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Toby Champion <[email protected]>wrote: > ... except that was 4 years ago and two of his three examples have broken > links. D'uh. > > > On 4/24/13 9:08 PM, Toby Champion wrote: > > Alex Martelli answers this SO question on this topic: > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1288198/can-someone-suggest-a-well-designed-python-wrapper-of-a-rest-api > > Toby > > On 4/24/13 8:25 PM, Jim Gray wrote: > > You usually want to follow the pattern actor.action(data) and not > data.action(). Better grammar and no confusion about which actor performs > action. > > It is also more DRY and more friendly to duck typing. Which objects can > .store()? > > If you really want to do it the second way, consider using decorators such > that my_object inherits the relevant bits from rest_service. > > Jim > > > >
