Re: [Configobj-develop] Finally getting to use ConfigObj :-)

[Nicola L. <ni...@te...>]

> I'd like to minimise any future API growth as much as possible.
> 
> I'd like to *consider* removing the following methods :
> 
>   encode
>   decode
>   rename

Negative API growth is good. :-)


> I do know of at least two users who use the ``walk`` method, so we
> probably need to keep it.

I'd keep that one, yes.


> One possibly uses the rename method. Hmmm...

Is it just a shortcut for one reassignment plus one deletion? It doesn't
seem worth much.


> After Guido's comments I'd even consider *not* subclassing dict, and
> only implementing those mapping protocol methods that are actually
> appropriate. Ripping stuff out isn't my *immediate* priority though.

We have yet to check whether being a dict subclass helps, or not, with
Twisted's Perspective Broker serialization. I'll let you know.


> I've also wondered if there might be any use for a 'ConfigObj-lite' ?
> ConfigObj now weighs in at around 115k, which is quite hefty if all you
> want to do is *read* config files.

More than half of it are doctests, and even more than that for validate.py.
I'd rather *increase* the size of the archive by including the 2.4 version
of doctest.py from the stdlib. That way we could separate the doctests in
their own files, and still have them work on Python 2.2 and 2.3.

That would bring down the file sizes even for the full-feature version.


> It occurs to me that it would be possible to create a much smaller
> 'reader only' which doesn't support validation or writing. That would be
> especially true if some of the dictionary methods were also removed. It
> wouldn't be very much work as it would be almost straight 'ripping-out'
> of code.

Having done the above, maybe a read-only version wouldn't be that much
appealing anymore. Even if it would still be so, I would not manage and
distribute it separately, but maybe have the read-write one subclass, and
add one file to, the read-only one.

But I wonder whether it would be worthy the added complication.

-- 
Nicola Larosa - http://www.tekNico.net/

...I do no real world applications like triple mersenne first person
shooters, only business software like the one which in earlier time
was written in COBOL or carved into cave walls. Less challenge,
higher reward. -- Harald Armin Massa, November 2005