Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #36071 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-01-03 12:16 -0500 |
| Last post | 2013-01-03 12:16 -0500 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Can't seem to start on this "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2013-01-03 12:16 -0500
| From | "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-03 12:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Can't seem to start on this |
| Message-ID | <mailman.48.1357233419.2939.python-list@python.org> |
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:59:04 -0500 Kene Meniru <Kene.Meniru@illom.org> wrote: > Yes, I guess that is the main thing. I do not want users to have to > write python code unless they are interested in customizing how the 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. > 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. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. IM: darcy@Vex.Net
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web