Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!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 0.026 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.95; '*S*': 0.00; 'nasty': 0.07; 'cc:addr :python-list': 0.09; 'core,': 0.09; 'credentials,': 0.09; 'identifier,': 0.09; 'instances.': 0.09; 'optional': 0.09; 'url:github': 0.09; 'argument': 0.15; "(it's": 0.16; 'accounts?': 0.16; 'circumvent': 0.16; 'core.': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'multiple,': 0.16; 'subject:exception': 0.16; 'url:py': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'module,': 0.18; '(in': 0.18; '2015': 0.20; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'suggested': 0.20; 'am,': 0.23; 'code.': 0.23; 'references': 0.23; 'sets': 0.23; 'second': 0.24; 'import': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'mon,': 0.24; 'module': 0.25; 'appear': 0.26; 'parameters': 0.27; 'separate': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'issue,': 0.27; 'module.': 0.27; 'function': 0.28; 'if,': 0.29; 'initialized': 0.29; 'itself,': 0.29; 'code': 0.30; 'core': 0.32; 'problem': 0.33; 'know.': 0.34; 'this?': 0.34; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'could': 0.35; "isn't": 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'possible': 0.36; 'keyword': 0.36; 'modules': 0.36; 'subject:work': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'agree': 0.37; 'expect': 0.37; 'several': 0.38; 'someone': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; 'why': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'takes': 0.39; 'subject:with': 0.40; 'your': 0.60; "you'll": 0.61; 'default': 0.61; 'success': 0.62; 'more': 0.63; 'different': 0.63; '20,': 0.66; 'accounts': 0.66; 'account': 0.66; 'choose': 0.68; 'accounts.': 0.72; 'jul': 0.72; 'yourself': 0.73; 'cecil': 0.84; 'chrisa': 0.84; 'style:': 0.84; 'subject:good': 0.84; 'url:cecilwesterhof': 0.84; 'url:master': 0.84; 'westerhof': 0.84; 'subject:this': 0.85; 'to:none': 0.91; 'choose.': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=gRQhlqW/i1ZrdfCvG/XIZ+JqEQqEcz5mN3s72lls5tg=; b=m7gULgZZ5Gxs3tGUuYJYVrK/NP2r80X5B1s9U990EVUV53O20glRBXQSqOPx9idenJ QcWXd/rtbSlA4fUW7n9BGJcuoHimIk7q0JXakmR0Z7YWZzjczUhe/k6S8+ZK5X24IO6M zsTuORxvIN6tSD4ps0Ue5+CfSCP6iGlz9QLPXKSWw2HOPTtb0fKRzDJawcLaXqdGwdPL aNye477RxvKLBFyg5rseSIWQ1eK1/NC0YG8x5ruDL63offuSh+kyKpcQS/FIfWZo309C Ss4UfZBvbNyQb3RApiUCerKKVuNsv0cFonJDf2owYAMtCJoQS5iRDRoNmRmjnjiTG6HF hpPw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.132.7 with SMTP id g7mr31343131iod.9.1437345636508; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87615fyem2.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> References: <87380kzb8b.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87r3o4xfhx.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87io9gx8tb.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87615fyem2.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:40:36 +1000 Subject: Re: Is this a good way to work with init and exception From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ 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: 34 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437345644 news.xs4all.nl 2945 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:38145 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94171 On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Cecil Westerhof wrote: >> If two modules import the same module, they get two references to >> that same module, not two separate module instances. Since your >> parameters appear only to affect the initialization itself, this is >> not likely to be a problem (it's not like you'll need to >> authenticate with two different sets of credentials, for instance), >> but it will mean that the second one will import an >> already-initialized module. That's why I suggested the try_init >> function which would quietly return an immediate success if the >> module had already been initialized. But if this isn't going to be >> an issue, then your code's fine. > > Good to know. I would expect two different instances. > > I agree that in my case it would not be a problem, but I put the code > on GitHub: > https://github.com/CecilWesterhof/PythonLibrary/blob/master/twitterDecebal.py > I should do my best to circumvent nasty surprises for users of the > code. Someone else could use several Twitter accounts at the same > time. Is there a way to do this? Does the instantiation of Core() involve authentication? Is it possible to call Core() more than once and use different accounts? Your send_message() takes an account identifier, so it might be you don't need separate accounts. But if, just very occasionally, you do need multiple, here's a possible design style: Have init() return the Core as well as stashing it in _core, and then have send_message() take an optional keyword argument (in 3.x, keyword-only) to choose a different core. That way, it'll by default use the most recently initialized core, but you can create multiple and manage them yourself if you so choose. (Obviously you'd use reinit_allowed=True for all the initializations.) ChrisA