Marc Lindahl wrote:
> on 5/10/02 11:32 AM, Chris Withers at [EMAIL PROTECTED] scrivened:
> > Marc Lindahl wrote:
> >>
> >> Don't you have that now with the kludgey 'not' construct?
> >
> > What is kludgey about the 'not:' construct?!
> For the reasons 'else' was invented in the first place,

'else' in what context?!

>  I guess:  prone to
> errors, inefficient, bulky. 

Can you give any material that actually backs up these sweeping claims? ;-)

> The biggest thing I see is: isn't linked to the
> other construct, so it's prone to errors when editing the conditions.

Well, I've already shown the way I'd do this which only has the condition in one



Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to