Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news-out2.kabelfoon.nl!newsfeed.kabelfoon.nl!xindi.nntp.kabelfoon.nl!feed.xsnews.nl!border-3.ams.xsnews.nl!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!news2.euro.net!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 0.009 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'python': 0.09; '"a"': 0.09; 'assumed': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subclass': 0.09; '"b"': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'say.': 0.16; 'subject:start': 0.16; 'later': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'config': 0.17; 'code.': 0.20; 'trying': 0.21; 'parse': 0.22; 'runs': 0.22; 'script': 0.24; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'creating': 0.26; 'interface': 0.27; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.28; 'yes.': 0.29; 'becomes': 0.30; 'sense': 0.31; 'code': 0.31; 'file': 0.32; 'received:comcast.net': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'updated': 0.34; 'thanks': 0.34; 'requiring': 0.35; 'too.': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'received:org': 0.36; 'but': 0.36; 'wanted': 0.36; 'modules': 0.36; 'beyond': 0.37; 'option': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'instead': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'skip:" 10': 0.40; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'first': 0.61; 'provide': 0.62; 'more': 0.63; 'taking': 0.65; 'header:Reply- To:1': 0.68; 'reply-to:no real name:2**0': 0.72; 'subject:this': 0.84; '(global': 0.84; 'packaged': 0.84 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Kene Meniru Subject: Re: Can't seem to start on this Followup-To: gmane.comp.python.general Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 12:36:52 -0500 Organization: illom.org References: <20130103082031.73a5b842@dilbert> <20130103093015.2b46908f@dilbert> <20130103121632.6af0a3e4@dilbert> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-69-143-75-245.hsd1.md.comcast.net User-Agent: KNode/4.4.7 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Kene.Meniru@illom.org 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: 26 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1357234625 news.xs4all.nl 6898 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:39064 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:36072 D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > That works too. It's just that you had users writing Python code but > assumed that a three line subclass was beyond them. Not requiring them > to write any Python code is a better option than the first one (global > variables) that you proposed. That's all I am trying to say. > I understand. >> program behaves or perhaps a building component. In that case any of >> the other modules can be updated instead of "A". Actually "A" will >> not be part of the packaged program. > > Or "A" becomes the script that parses the config file and runs the > other code. > Yes. To be more precise, later I will create "A_Interface" to provide the user with an interface for creating the contents of "A". "A_Interface" will then parse "A", calling "B" as required to create the artifact. I had wanted to jump into "A_Interface" using something like urwid or PyQt but it makes sense to work with "A" directly for now. Thanks for taking the time to understand.