Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> It sure would be nice if it had a docstring that at least indicated that 
>> was its only intended purpose.
> Now would be a good time for you to add that docstring to the trunk. :-)

Yes well, I apparently don't have enough knowledge to do this correctly.
Maybe someone with that knowledge could do so?

>>  From a use point of view, I'd only expect queryAdapter to consider 
>> looking for a named adapter if I actually provide a name. If I provide 
>> no name, it would seem logical to look up a non-named adapter. If 
>> looking up a non-named adapter, it would make sense if the object 
>> already provides the desired interfaces to just return the object.
>> I'd love to see where this expectation is faulty...
> I'm switching to Jim's side now. :-)  The semantics you described are 
> more magical.  

How so? I've given a very concise explanation of *why* it's not 
surprising for users for it to work the way I describe. The yway it 
currently works makes people except those involved in the development of 
the package go "wait, that's not what I expected to have happen, huh?"


Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to