Florent Guillaume wrote:
Dominik Huber wrote:

The modification descriptiors were introduced by Uwe Ostermeier to handle the versioning and cataloging stuff.

I seem to remember some discussion of this.  It provided a way to give
hints about what was changed.

>> I'm not an expert in that
field, but in my understanding the modification descriptors are more general and your case is a subset that could be handled with them. As a developer, I would still prefer one concept, because it's easier to adapt. Sufficiently fundamental cases are always a shaky discrimination to differ two concepts for future implementation decisions.

If you don't feel that containment boundaries are a sufficiently fundamental concept, then we have a strong disagreement. I stand by what I checked in.

And BTW with "modification descriptions" I couldn't write a simple adapter for this. I'd have to have a generic adapter for IObjectModifiedEvent, then iterate over all the descriptions and filter by hand. Yuck.

This is definately an advantage of the type-based approach.

OTOH, I think a description-based approach could be made to work.
I wonder if there are worked-out description-based strategies.
I worry that, while the description-based strategy has some
potential merit, it isn't adequately worked out.


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to