At 05:42 PM 1/10/05 -0500, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Jan 10, 2005, at 16:38, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 07:42 PM 1/10/05 +0100, Alex Martelli wrote:
On 2005 Jan 10, at 18:43, Phillip J. Eby wrote: ...I am not saying we shouldn't have a tp_conform; just suggesting that it may be appropriate for functions and modules (as well as classic classes) to have their tp_conform delegate back to self.__dict__['__conform__'] instead of a null implementation.
I have not considered conformance of such objects as functions or modules; if that is important,
It's used in at least Zope and PEAK; I don't know if it's in use in Twisted.
SVN trunk of Twisted (what will be 2.0) uses zope.interface.
What I meant was, I don't know if Twisted actually *uses* interface declarations for modules and functions. It has the ability to do so, certainly. I was just saying I didn't know if the ability is actually used.
PEAK uses some interfaces for functions, but I don't think I've ever used them for modules, and can think of only one place in PEAK where it would make sense to declare a module as supporting an interface. Zope policy is to use interfaces for *everything*, though, including documenting the interface provided by modules.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
