> >From: Michel Pelletier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Well, Jim, Evan, Brian and I pow-wowed yesterday and came up with an
> >interesting change.  The world 'Method' is too overlaoded, as it means
> >too much to too many people.  Also, Python Methods don't work like
> >methods in python, which was my argument, but they are very useful and
> >there are sound reasons for them working like they do (which J, E and B
> >convinced me of yesterdat).  We have decided to change the name of
> >Python Methods to something else, the current candidate being 'Python
> >Script'.

Well, I think script ain't right. How about 'Function', since, to me,
the things you've described sound exactly like normal Python Functions.
A function is callable but has no logic about a magic 'self' argument or
anything else, for that matter.

> >methods, they describe an action that people commonly want to do (script
> >the web) and they clear up a lot of potential confusion for newbie and
> >old-hat alike.

'script' implies a sequential execution of a lump of code that doesn't
'return' anything. That doesn't sound like the old Python Methods.
They get arguments (from the namespace, some of which is introduced by
the bindings tab) and return something, probably text, that results from
their execution and, I guess, their return statement. Just to overstate
the point (;-), that sounds like a function to me...

> >Python Methods have five
> >special variables (defined on the bindings tab) that get created in the
> >namespace of the method.  Should perl methods work the same way and not
> >have special variables passed in as arguments?  

Sounds like they should have a binding tab and no 'special' self
argument. Maybe they should both subclass a generic 'Function' object
which provides the interface for this? Then other languages might get
implemented later down the line ;-)



Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to