That would not be very hard to implant.
I will look into adding support for it.
On 1/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have one big qualm with the way feeds are handled in TG.
>
> Each time you create a feed, you must also create a new class
> associated with that feed. If you were writing in Java, you'd be
> implementing an interface where the get_feed_data is the only function
> you need to implement. Another way to look at it is you are overriding
> an abstract method.
>
> But this isn't Java or C++; this is Python, and we have the wonderful
> ability to pass functions as arguments. Wouldn't it be much more
> pythonic to do this:
>
> class Controller:
> def implement_function():
> ...blah...
> feed = FeedObject( implement_function )
>
> instead of this:
>
> class feed( FeedObject ):
> def get_feed_data( self ):
> ... rewrite implement function ....
>
> class Controller:
> feed = feed()
>
> This would possibly be a breaking change to the FeedObject, but feels
> much more natural. Further, it would be a closer match to how CatWalk
> works.
>
>
--
cheers
elvelind grandin
