Re: summary of discussion was: adapter vs factory Re: implementing zope.component 4.0
Gary Poster <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Dec 1, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Chris McDonough wrote: > Martijn Faassen wrote: >> ... > I am also in favor of unifying adapter and utility lookup. Or at least > creating a more normalized API. I guess it is no surprise that I am in favor of a normalized API but against the unification. > On the syntax of the change: [...] I followed vaguely. This was about unification, correct? > On the semantics of the change: > > Personally I think that it's a fantasy to believe that the difference between > an object created via a factory on-demand and an object simply returned should > *never* matter to a caller. You may not want the caller to need to care, and > it may be inconvenient to take into account circumstances where the caller > needs to care. But because this is Python, the caller still often does need to > care. Again, no surprise that I agree with this and following. Gary _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [email protected] https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )