Re: summary of discussion was: adapter vs factory Re: implementing zope.component 4.0
Martijn Faassen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Gary Poster wrote: > You are leaving out the variants of 3 and 4 that allow calling the > interface to support multiadaptation, but do not unify utilities. True, my mistake. Lennart pointed that out too just now. > My impression is that I am not the only one who is not pleased with > the proposed unification of utilities and adaptation. I've tried to analyze why that might be so elsewhere. There are three perspectives that I can see: * everything registered is really a factory. Returning a utility just requires registering a special factory. * everything registered is really an instance. Calling an adapter is just looking up an instance and then calling it. * we have two kinds of things registered, instances and factories. zope.component does that today. > My impression is that we are nearing consensus on the variation of 3 > that does not include utilities. I could live with that, as long as we had a way to look up utilities on the interface too. Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ 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 )