Chris McDonough wrote:
> On the semantics of the change:
> Personally I think that it's a fantasy to believe that the difference between
> an object created via a factory on-demand and an object simply returned
> *never* matter to a caller. You may not want the caller to need to care, and
> it may be inconvenient to take into account circumstances where the caller
> needs to care. But because this is Python, the caller still often does need
> The only circumstance where a caller would *never* need to care would be when
> the object returned could be guaranteed to *never ever* have any methods
> on it that weren't part of the interface defined by the interface being
> up. If we want this, we should probably just be using Java.
I'll retract this.
If you want to create a world where callers never need to care about the
lifetime of any object returned by a component lookup, you could also return a
proxy wrapper around the returned object that only allows for the invocation of
the methods defined in the interface looked up. Any other access or invocation
would raise an exception.
This would make this worldview 100% consistent, completely documentable, and
would cause no confusion during use. It would thus remove any logical argument
I have against it. I wouldn't be eager to use such a system, but it's totally
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -