On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 07:42:29 -0400, Jim Fulton <jim@digicool.com> wrote:
Toby Dickenson wrote:
I'm not sure exactly what problem you are refering to. It sound's like an issue of depending on a specific acquired name and having the name overridden with something bogus. Is that it?
There are two related issues that conspire to make the problem hard:
A. What you descibe above, that looks like it will be fixed in part by NO_SUBOBJECTS_OVERRIDE (which looks great). The outstanding issue is what happens when a new version of a product wants to add a new NO_SUBOBJECTS_OVERRIDE name (when objects of that name may already exist in old subobjects).
I think that there should be some discussion of this design pattern. Specifically, I'm not sure I like the idea of an application that depends on fixed names in a hierarchy. In fact, I know I don't. :)
The technique isnt nice, but its hardly unconventional. the REQUEST object (as in self.REQUEST) is a good example.
*I* would like to see this discussion happen in a Wiki, but I won't insist. :) FWIW, it will be much more likely for me to make comments in a wiki, especially if someone sends me the wiki link when they are ready for comments.
I start something later this week. Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com