Re: [Rest2web-develop] "none" and "multiple" checks are no more :-)
Brought to you by:
mjfoord
From: Nicola L. <ni...@te...> - 2005-08-16 08:59:32
|
> I did some more work on the docs, but still not finished. I need to look > over the 'final' implementation - particularly for validate. > > As always your proofreading will be appreciated. Same applies to module > docstrings. > > I'm going to prepare a release based on this... Let me know once you have updated the docs, and before release. Are you going to release just ConfigObj, or the whole PythonUtils? The CaselessDict is still there... ;-) >> The real test will happen when I integrate it in the code, but that will >> have to wait some time. I don't expect problems, apart from the fact that >> currently config is traversed with dot (attribute) notation, and all uses >> will have to be converted to dict notation. > Ok - adding attribute access would be easy (ConfigObj3 has it). I'd > rather not have it as a feature (I think dictionary notation is more > appropriate; members are members, not attributes) - but writing a > wrapper class would be simple..... (Better to switch to the new way > though..) I'm torn on this issue. On one hand I'd like to avoid all that rewriting, and I like attribute access better, from both a writing and reading point of view. I don't think appropriateness is really an issue, BTW: it's just semantic quibbling. :-) On the other I don't like the fact that it's less general than member notation: one can only use legal Python identifiers for attribute access. This isn't usually a practical problem, and can be worked around with getattr: then it would get so ugly that in that case member notation is preferable. :-) In the end, balancing pros and cons, I'd say that it would be worthwhile to restore it, if you can find a clean, little-disruptive way. How would that wrapper class work? -- Nicola Larosa - ni...@te... Python is the best thing I've seen in 30 years of computing for pedogogical and productive purposes. Only when I want speed do I see a need for something else. -- Chuck Allison, June 2005 |