Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-10-7 23:51 +0200: > ... >> I find that the introduction of classes with (multiple) inheritance >> has been very economic. It was another concept but a highly fruitful >> one, despite the fact that they are not so liked in Zope3 land. > >I think "fat" objects from mixing many different concerns into a single >implementation are a failed approach. > >Seeing how flexible you can be wit > > a) separating concerns (functionality, responsibilities) into >separate objects called components and > > b) making the lookup of these components pluggable (using registries >a.k.a. the Component Architecture),
I am almost convinced that in some years these registries will share the fate of acquisition: they will be seens as too much magic. I expect this to happen as soon as Zope3 is becoming main stream and not only used by the fittest people. >I would not recommend anyone to over-use multiple inheritance as it's >been done in Zope 2. I am a strong favorite of (multiple) inheritance and use it excessively. I have the feeling that it makes me very productive. -- Dieter _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
