Re: Release 0.2a0?

Magnus Lie Hetland wrote:
> Samuele Pedroni <[email protected]>:
 >>
>>We could avoid to add the names of props bound to models in the name list
>>passed in [2], but when changing more than one single prop, the best thing
>>would be to avoid to call [1].
>>
>>B) retrieving comp.prop1 can pull the value from the widget, then if prop1 is
>>bound to a modal its value is (should be) changed but this would trigger a
>>spurious push...
> 
> 
> Why? I don't see why modifying the model should trigger a push? Of
> course modify() calls push, but that's beside the point. My view is
> that using foo.rawModify(bar=fnord) should not call foo.push(), even
> if bar is a model. The idea with models is that *other* objects are
> allowed to listen in on their state. If the component itself wants to
> do so it is allowed to of course, but if it links this listening to
> push, then a "spurious" push is exactly what one would expect.
> 
> (Though I still have a sneaking suspicion that I'm not getting the
> point here :)

We certainly want the on-screen widget to reflect the state of
the model, correct? Seems to me that means proxies must listen
to their models, if any.

Personally, I think MVC is buying us a lot of complication for
no real benefit; if we concentrate on producing a simple widget
API, people can build MVC atop that. (Have I said that before?
I can't remember...)

-- Joe



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf