Previously Martin Aspeli wrote: > Shane Hathaway wrote: > > Fernando Correa Neto wrote: > >> Adding new template engines to BFG require you to know python while in > >> GROK, it'd require you to grok grok first (which in would then > >> introduce the developer to ZCA) which is definitely a Zope3 thing. > > > > You hit on a point that I consider important. One of the interesting > > things about ZCML (and hence BFG) is it's easy for any Python developer > > to write their own directives. ZCML doesn't violate DRY, as I once > > thought it did, because if you find yourself writing repetitive > > directives, you can just create a custom directive in Python instead. > > > > Unfortunately, Grok obscures that simplicity. It seems much harder to > > add new kinds of decorators than it is to add new kinds of ZCML directives. > > You're sure about that? I find it easier to write a new grokker (whether > for a decorator or a more generic class grokker that looks for a base > class) than a new ZCML directive (and I've done plenty of both).
Approaching this from another point of view: debugging a grokker that does not behave as you expect is much harder than debugging a zcml statement or a python imperative statement. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman <wich...@wiggy.net> It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. _______________________________________________ Repoze-dev mailing list Repoze-dev@lists.repoze.org http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev
