Unless i hear otherwise, i'll plan to do make the changes outlined below.
At 04:38 PM 7/11/2005, Bret Pettichord wrote:
At 12:04 PM 7/11/2005, Paul Rogers wrote:
What do you think we should remove? The methods that do the default
atribute stuff and the unit tests?
Yes. The way i'd do it would be to tag HEAD ("default_attribute_stuff"),
then delete the methods and tests. At some future date, someone can easily
find this code and continue working on it.
Just to be clear, my main issue with this is that many of our objects
already have built in defaults (e.g. buttons are value, frames are names).
I think the new interface should encapsulate this legacy behavior, rather
than add yet another default mechanism on top of it.
Thus for a generic ie, ie.default_attributes would return {:button =>
:value, :frame => :name, ...} I'm also unsure whether the keys should be
these index values or the classes themselves ({Button => :value, Frame =>
:name}), and that makes me wonder whether the defaulting should be done at
the class level or at the IE level.
But any of these ideas requires some increased consistency in the existing
code before they could be implemented.
Since the default mechanism is really just a convenience mechanism, i
think that it is important that it actually be done cleanly, otherwise it
just adds needsless confusion.
(I also think the method names are wrong, but that would be easy to fix.)
Bret
_____________________
Bret Pettichord
www.pettichord.com
_____________________
Bret Pettichord
www.pettichord.com
_______________________________________________
Wtr-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-general
