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
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