On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 14:17, Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote: ... > With martian, the registration is then done by the grokking process, > but I think decorators would be a process that is more acceptable to > the Python world in general. Instances does indeed require something > else than decorators, I hadn't thought of that, that's a drawback.
I think Martijn raised a good question about the conceptual interaction of class decorators and inheritance. (Arguablly the questions applies to the "advice"-based syntax as well.) If I see: @some_decorator class Base: .... class Sub(Base): ... I'm going to wonder how the decorator affects Sub. (Wondering is work. :) This might be OK for @implements and maybe @adapts, which describe behavior, but start feeling wonky to me for something like: @utility. Maybe it's enough to document what the directives do. Or maybe something less attached to the class definition would make sense. I don't know what the right answer is ... at least not yet. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )