[Grok-dev] grokcore view

Souheil CHELFOUH trollfot at gmail.com
Sat Dec 19 18:13:33 EST 2009

This could be improved if we can have grokked that work on interfaces
implementation and not classes.
I think we could, then, have a pluggable static grokker, a pluggable
template grokker and so on

2009/12/19 Jan-Wijbrand Kolman <janwijbrand at gmail.com>:
> Souheil CHELFOUH <trollfot at gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, ViewSupport is fine, but, does not provide enough (in my opinion,
>> for what it worths)
>> Thing is : in view-ish component, we might also need security or/and
>> static or/and namespace...
>> What i'm trying to thing of, is a way to easily plug all these
>> features, independently on components.
> I think I understand what you're saying.
> When I was working on the ViewSupport mixin I felt the current solution
> - a mixin class - wasn't the most beautiful to get the methods and
> properties defined in one placed and used in multiple components.
> That's the reason why grok.View itself does not mixin ViewishViewSupport
> to gain application_url(), but defines it itself - would it have mixed
> in ViewishViewSupport as well, the class hierarchy would've been quite
> awful.
> Anyway, discussing this with Reinout irl didn't bring us any ideas
> either, and I went with the current solution.
> For you ViewSupport in a way does not provide enough, for me it kinda
> does too much - I hardly use static and namespace for example. So a
> better way to plug these features in and out would indeed be great.
> (as an aside note, let's not experiment with this for the 1.1 release,
> but yeah, any idea to improve this would be very welcome).
> regards,
> jw
> _______________________________________________
> Grok-dev mailing list
> Grok-dev at zope.org
> https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/grok-dev

More information about the Grok-dev mailing list