On Aug 16, 6:17 pm, Christoph Zwerschke <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 16.08.2010 23:35 schrieb Phillip J. Eby: > > > I went ahead and pushed out a new snapshot (r2672) with both a fix and > > the new priority() feature. Sorry again about the mixup. > > Thanks for the quick response, Phillip. I will use that feature in > TurboJson then. >
Just to be clear, I should mention that, now that I've seen what you're doing with it in TurboJson, the new priority() feature is *not* appropriate for that use case. That is, the new priority() does not allow you to define "lower-than- normal" priorities. Until now, it honestly never occurred to me that someone would need such a thing, since the One Obvious Way (but maybe not so obvious if you're not me!) to do that would be to put those rules in the main function body, or in a "default cases" generic registered as the default case of the user-facing function. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en.
