Re: A summary of "Interfaces vs ZCA concepts"
Lennart Regebro <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 08:51, Brian Sutherland <[email protected]> wrote: > I like things to fail noisily and loudly unconfigured and give good > information about what's wrong. +1 > So my preferred implementation of a > stub "utility" function on Interface is: > > def utility(default=None): > """Lookup a utility for this interface. > > A utility is a ${long explanation of utility concept}. > > This method behaves like ${explanation of utility method contract}. > """ > raise NotImplementedError("""No Utility lookup mechanism has been configured. > If you wish to use utility lookups on interfaces, please configure a > package that contains this mechanism. Packages known to > implement this are: > zope.component > """) > > I agree that this encodes in the zope.interface package concepts from > zope.component. I think that is stretching the "encoding concepts" a bit too far. Yes, we make zope.interface aware that such a thing as utility-registries exist, but say we don't implement it. I don't think that's a problem. The error message also gives an example of an implementation. That's probably not a problem either. > I feel uncomfortable about that. I don't. :-) -- Lennart Regebro: http://regebro.wordpress.com/ Python 3 Porting: http://python-incompatibility.googlecode.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ 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 )