|
From: Norbert N. <Nor...@gm...> - 2004-11-26 08:05:56
|
Hi there,
seems like we are synchronizing rather badly in our work and our messages to
the list. :-)
> Before we reapply your patch to raise on bad kwargs, I think it's
> worth getting some input if we want to raise on nonexistent keys...
Ok, there's a point. I did not even think that there would be any controversy,
but what you point out should certainly be considered.
Basically, this is a question about the philosophy of properties in general:
Should properties be settable just per-object, or should settings be
propagated to the children. I believe the current state is not fully
consistent in that respect.
What you are proposing is an interesting idea, but if it is adopted, it should
be done in general and not only in certain places. And in that case, it might
become rather complex. Properties would have to be uniquely identifiable by
name only. (I.e. all linewidths have to be called just "linewidth", so an
object that contains different lines that should be configurable
independently have to be split in separate sub-objects) The passing of
properties should happen everywhere in the library - otherwise it will be
more confusing than helpful.
Currently, it seems to me that there is a rather weak distinction between
properties and just plain kwargs. This should probably be sorted out before
adopting a policy of passing all kwargs on to the children.
And as for silently ignoring unknown arguments: I still do not really like
that idea. It smells like a source of hard to find bugs.
Ciao,
Nobbi
--
_________________________________________Norbert Nemec
Bernhardstr. 2 ... D-93053 Regensburg
Tel: 0941 - 2009638 ... Mobil: 0179 - 7475199
eMail: <No...@Ne...>
|