Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #70554

Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2014-04-23 21:57, tim.thelion@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am currently writting a program called subuser(subuser.org), which
> is written as classically imperative code.  Subuser is, essentially,
> a package manager.  It installs and updates programs from
> repositories.
>
> I have a set of source files
> https://github.com/subuser-security/subuser/tree/master/logic/subuserCommands/subuserlib
> which have functions in them.  Each function does something to a
> program, it identifies the program by the programs name.  For
> example, I have an installProgram function defined as such:
>
> def installProgram(programName, useCache):
>
> Now I've run into a flaw in this model.  There are certain situations
> where a "programName" is not a unique identifier. It is possible for
> two repositories to each have a program with the same name.
> Obviously, I could go through my code and replace all use of the
> string "programName" with a tuple of (programName, repository).  Or I
> could define a new class with two attributes: programName and
> repository, and pass such a simple object arround, or pass a
> dictionary.  However, I think this would be better solved by moving
> fully to an OOP model.  That is, I would have a SubuserProgram class
> which had methods such as "install", "describe", "isInstalled"...
>
[snip]
Could you make the program name unique just by combining it with the
repository name in a single string?

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one tim.thelion@gmail.com - 2014-04-23 13:57 -0700
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-23 22:15 +0100
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-23 15:23 -0600
    Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-04-24 12:26 +1200
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-04-23 14:42 -0700
    Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one tim.thelion@gmail.com - 2014-04-24 00:32 -0700
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-04-24 00:08 +0100
    Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one tim.thelion@gmail.com - 2014-04-24 00:21 -0700
      Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-24 17:36 +1000
      Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-24 09:08 +0000
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-24 09:12 +1000
  Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-04-24 12:21 +1200
    Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one tim.thelion@gmail.com - 2014-04-24 09:53 -0700
      Re: Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Amirouche Boubekki <amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 19:21 +0200
  Re:Moving to an OOP model from an classically imperitive one Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-04-23 22:01 -0400

csiph-web