Fabiano Sidler
fabianosidler at gmail.com
Sat Jan 14 06:57:41 EST 2006
2006/1/14, Graham Dumpleton <grahamd at dscpl.com.au>: > I used the term "complicated" because you use features line > metaclasses, static methods creation, overloading of new, etc. It just > seems to fail the test of keeping it simple for me. I can't really see the > reason for doing it all. The reason is that the user of my interface shouldn't have to care about things like a "req" object as well as applications using the interface should work without any change of code. Therefore, server-specific things must be done while importing the container, as there is, for example, setting the global name 'handler'. > You were somehow trying to stuff the handler() method > into a module of a class, but that wasn't going to work as the type of > cls.__module__ is a string not a module, so attempts to set Request > and handler in the module were going to be applied to a string object. Oops, my mistake! It was an untested example. In my other code, I pass sys.modules[cls.__module__] to loadmodule(), not cls.__module__ itself. Sorry for confusion! The strange thing is still the same: Why is the module string of the metaclass module being passed to loadmodule instead of the module string of the class object being created by the metaclass, cls.__module__? I can't see a solution for this! :( Greetings, Fips
|