Jean Jordaan wrote:
int: -- Look up an item by index

Hate this. Looks like a typecast of some kind, int is way to overused

Aesthetically, I also find it ugly. The attractiveness of a *path* expression lies in its resemblance to a *path*.

True, but we've obviously reached a point where a simple POSIX like path is not sufficient anymore, because we apply it to a complicated Zope structure. some_function/returned-dict/some_key is really comparing "apples to a whole fruit salad" (quote from ChrisW or SteveA, can't remember). Thus we need to attach some kind of extra meaning to the elements, not only to tell Zope where they come from and how they have been interpreted, but also to make it cleaner for the programmer.

But I realise it's like the weird ++elements in Zope3 paths that
I hope never to need to deal with but will have to swallow sometime
willy nilly, and that no-one could think of anything better in that
case :|

Tough luck :). Well, it's actually the same thing as above. In Zope2, we've mixed content, configuration, code and presentation in one namespace. Since Zope3 inforces their separation, it only makes sense to have them live in different namespaces as well (we have ++etc++, ++skin++, ++vh++ and some more).

The decision what token to use for identifying namespaces has long been made. Sorry if you don't like it now... :(



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

Reply via email to