Kevin Dangoor wrote: > Nope, no crack there. You're right... this should more properly be a set. > > Kevin
I think I haven't explained myself well, I think template_vars should be remain a list (just to avoid the try/except NameError idiom for 2.3 in every module that implements widgets). The internal implementation for finding the union of all template_vars from all bases (which uses set) will take care of removing duplicates... What I was trying to say is that, being this safety-net in place, maybe a little extra redundancy when defining template_vars on a custom widget would not hurt. Ok, maybe a little code will disambiguate my spaninglish :) class MyWidget(Widget): template = """ <tag xmlns:py="http://purl.org/kid/ns#"; name="${name}"> <p py:for="i in xrange(count)">I will not repeat myself!</p> </tag> """" template_vars = ["name", "count"] As "name" is already listed as a template_var at Widget, there's no real need to list it at this subclass, but, as it's template uses it, listing it here makes clearer that the variable comes from the widget instance and that it can be overriden via display() (without even looking at the template). The thing is, the more I explain it, the less sure I am about it... :/ Better let the design-gurus decide... Alberto
