Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.005 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'read.': 0.03; 'syntax': 0.04; 'say,': 0.05; 'context': 0.07; 'explicit': 0.07; 'nested': 0.07; 'english,': 0.09; 'lst': 0.09; 'python:': 0.09; 'scripts,': 0.09; 'subject:design': 0.09; 'wrapper': 0.09; 'subject:Help': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; "'a',": 0.16; 'blocks': 0.16; 'effect.': 0.16; 'inclined': 0.16; 'received:74.55.86': 0.16; 'received:74.55.86.74': 0.16; 'received:smtp.webfaction.com': 0.16; 'received:webfaction.com': 0.16; 'subject:API': 0.16; 'vastly': 0.16; 'window;': 0.16; 'world!")': 0.16; 'weird': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'all,': 0.19; 'acquired': 0.19; 'normally': 0.19; 'seems': 0.21; 'command': 0.22; 'example': 0.22; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.23; 'documented': 0.24; 'simpler': 0.24; 'switched': 0.24; 'script': 0.25; 'switch': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'function': 0.29; 'michael': 0.29; 'rest': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'generally': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'ignored.': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'gives': 0.31; 'code': 0.31; 'easier': 0.31; 'reply.': 0.31; 'too.': 0.31; '(since': 0.31; 'block,': 0.31; 'context,': 0.31; 'received:192.168.1.3': 0.31; 'handled': 0.32; 'option': 0.32; '(i.e.': 0.33; 'maybe': 0.34; "i'd": 0.34; 'could': 0.34; 'problem': 0.35; 'subject: (': 0.35; 'common': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'done': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'wrong': 0.37; 'thank': 0.38; 'manager': 0.38; 'actions': 0.38; 'window': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'short': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'bad': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'changed': 0.39; 'called': 0.40; 'users': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'commands': 0.60; 'dangerous': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'managers': 0.61; 'new': 0.61; 'march': 0.61; 'entire': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'further': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; "you've": 0.63; 'kind': 0.63; 'different': 0.65; 'afraid': 0.65; 'within': 0.65; '26,': 0.68; 'advantages': 0.68; 'feeling': 0.68; 'of:': 0.68; 'food': 0.72; 'to,': 0.72; 'miss': 0.74; "'with'": 0.84; 'balanced': 0.84; "it'd": 0.84; 'off,': 0.84; 'realistic': 0.93; '2013': 0.98 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:41:38 -0400 From: Mitya Sirenef User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Help me pick an API design (OO vs functional) References: <68da956e-ebe0-4f58-92cd-f7ffff0075b4@googlegroups.com> <01a290d9-6a59-45ad-bc30-e09d13aa7799@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <01a290d9-6a59-45ad-bc30-e09d13aa7799@googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 120 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1364305302 news.xs4all.nl 6971 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:53367 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:41901 On 03/26/2013 05:38 AM, Michael Herrmann wrote: > On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 12:40:45 AM UTC+1, Mitya Sirenef wrote: >> ... >> >> I think I would prefer context managers. I don't think it's a big >> problem for >> win users because this behaviour would be one of the first things documented >> in the start guide and would be all over example scripts, so a new user >> missing >> or forgetting it is not a realistic scenario. >> >> The advantages are that it's explicit, blocks are indented and it's >> impossible to >> miss which window is the action applied to, and at the same time actions are >> short and easy to type and read. > > Thank you for your reply. What do you think of Chris Angelico's points? At the __exit__, further commands are no longer routed to that window; if it was a nested context, window is switched to the outer context, WHEN there are commands in it (i.e. on the first command). This seems pretty intuitive to me: with notepad1: ^S with notepad2: ^S write('something') > > He wrote: >> What happens at the __exit__ of the context manager? What happens if >> context managers are nested? I'd be inclined to the simpler option of >> an explicit switch (since focus doesn't really "stack" and it'd feel >> weird for focus to *sometimes* switch away when you're done working >> with one window), though the context manager syntax does have its >> advantages too. > > What I am most afraid of: that the window that's currently the context "disappears": > notepad = start("Notepad") > with notepad: > press(ALT + TAB) > write("Am I in Notepad now?") Alt-tab needs to be handled by a wrapper function that gives you the object of the window you've switched to: otherwin = alt_tab() with otherwin: ... If window is changed within 'with' block, the rest of block should be ignored. Perhaps there could also be a way to switch this behaviour off, for the entire script or for current block only. > > What do you think of designs #3 and #4? > > notepad_1 = start("Notepad") > notepad_2 = start("Notepad") > switch_to(notepad_1) > write("Hello World!") > press(CTRL + 'a', CTRL + 'c') > switch_to(notepad_2) > press(CTRL + 'v') > > notepad_1 = start("Notepad") > notepad_2 = start("Notepad") > notepad_1.activate() > write("Hello World!") > press(CTRL + 'a', CTRL + 'c') > notepad_2.activate() > press(CTRL + 'v') > > I somehow prefer "activate" over "focus" as in my feeling, you'd normally say that you focus *on* something, so it should be called "focus_on" or "give_focus[_to]". Can you say, in everyday English, that you "focus a window"? I'm not a native speaker so maybe my feeling is misguided. These are ok, too, but I feel it's much easier to send commands to a wrong window vs. context managers. The same command in a different window can have vastly different and dangerous effect. In other python code that's generally not common at all, and would be bad style: lst = lst1 lst.append('x') del lst[3] lst.insert(0, 'a') lst = lst2 del lst[2] lst.append('y') lst = lst3 lst.insert(0, 'x') lst += [1,2] I think current window should also be acquired explicitly: with get_current_window(): type("some kind of snippet") For usage when a command should apply to all types of windows. HTH, -m -- Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/ Food is an important part of a balanced diet. Fran Lebowitz