Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That said, I can live with most of the crap, but these dynamically
>> generated classes... wtf? why? why did that? why are they still breathing?!
> *sigh* I don't know who came up with the idea, and I don't really care
> as I don't want to point fingers at anyone. The reasons are probably
Philipp, note that we're dynamically generating some classes in
dynamically generated class for templates that don't have classes of
themselves. I know you were there when we created this one. :)
template = unassociated
module_info = module_info_
of course the instances of this class do nothing the developer has to
interact with. As soon as the developer provides a view class of their
own, there's no dynamically generated class anymore. I think that this
is an acceptable use of the pattern.
I've done it too recently in the form support. The *real* formlib-level
form class is dynamically created for each grok-level form:
form_fields = get_form_fields(factory, context)
actions = actions_
This one is a bit more scary, as the end-user interacts with an
*instance* of this class; the form attribute on grok-level forms is one.
Of course there were good reasons to do this - I wanted to avoid
mixing formlib level forms with grok-level forms, as too many method
names were the same and making that horrible tangle work would've been
a lot more pain indeed, I think.
Zope3-dev mailing list