Thanks for touching up my work. I know I've got a lot to learn, especially about producing good documentation.
> It is very good, that you wrote also .txt documentation for the > taxprocessor. > I think, it is better to remove long implementation details, even then > the code can change, but the interface remain the same for long time. > For the user is important only to differentiate, that some method is > empty and should be defined, some has a self-explanatory one line code > and other is more complicated. Do you propose that instead of the sample processor in the .txt doc, we have an explanation of each of the methods? Or is that already covered by the more thorough docstrings you added? Is there anything else that should be covered in the .txt doc that isn't? > Nan, you forgot to change > self.tax = processor.by_orderitem(self) Where was this change omitted? > The name "by_price_and_product" is longer than I can read by a glance > and with the additional parameter it is much less readable then the > original. > What about "by_price_obj"? (By price and some not trivial object, the > price is usually just the only important and the used keyword > "product=" explains everything.) I have no objections to renaming it -- what's important to me is that we're actually passing the product in the calls to it, and making calls to the new method instead of directly to by_price. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Satchmo users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-users?hl=en.
