Garrett Smith wrote: > Jim Fulton wrote: >> Garrett Smith wrote: >>> :-) I guess this approach is *so* endemic to Zope 3, I must be >>> missing something huge. >> >> What we're talking about is not very different from the way that >> composition is used to prevent explosition of field types. >> >> For example, we use: List(Int()) rather than IntegerList. >> >> Note that we use a combination of type and composition, >> hopefully striking a good balence. > > I see your point. > > But events are essentially an API and a well defined contract is > better than an implicit one. I think we're going to see a lot code > that looks like this: > > if not 'my stuff' in event.extra: > return > doSomething()
I take this back -- we can always provide a multi-adapter delegator. That's actually pretty nice. > I also think this is being driven by the "I can imagine..." syndrome. I'm still concerned about WHUI. What in the core can be replaced with this new model? -- Garrett _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list [email protected] Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
