Gary Poster <gary.pos...@gmail.com> schrieb: > OK. I'll give it a whirl sometime over the next couple of weeks, if > that's soon enough for you.
Sure. > FWIW, I'd be strongly tempted to release *without* the generation > code, and leave it up to users to switch as they desire. Fine with me. I'm pretty confident of the other changes I've made, BTW, and there's not exactly a lot of them either. > 1) That's particularly pertinent for library bits like this because a > tree walker would have to walk over *all* attributes and __getitem__s > in order to find instances of things like a blist, which will > generally be hidden deep in application objects; or would have to use > an iteration protocol like the one that FileStorage provides. Right. Looking closer at the utility function I've used so far for walking the objects, I think it doesn't nearly cover all the places a dict could hide. > 2) Old instances (with lists, not blists) will still work fine with > the new code, and in fact should continue to work even with new apis > as long as the ordered dict apis use the list apis (like slices) to > manipulate the order. They do. > 3) How many people are really using the blist right now anyway in > production? No idea... > Generation code is hard to test in the abstract. Do we actually have any best practices for that? Viele Grüße, Thomas -- Thomas Lotze · t...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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 )