Hi! On Mar 20, 1:06 am, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > > What you wrote are two nested classes, not functions.
Ooops .. yes of course .. simple mistake (it was late .. :) > In my opinion, > neither should be nested. Nothing is gained and something is lost. > Neither are used by client; indeed both use client. I nested them because I see them as components of the client which keeps track of the connection parameters and makes the initial connection and then hands the info off to the two threads for processing, and then also helps the two threads communicate with each other. This seemed like a good choice to me, can you (or someone else) elaborate why this is not a good design? The idea was to encapsulate all the client info/code in one place. > I would rename '_parent' (misleading) as 'client' or 'user'. good suggestion .. I chose parent or could have chosen "outer" since I was looking for a way for the nested classes to access the outer class The series of assignments in __init__ in client was to store the connection parameters as instance variables in the outer client class. the __keepGoing__ variable is used to help the two threads communicate with each other and know when to shut down. This feedback is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for, thanks, I'm looking forward to more suggestions. Esmail -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list