(sent from wrong address) Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@me.com> > Date: December 6, 2010 2:03:54 PM PST > To: "web2py@googlegroups.com" <web2py@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: [web2py] Re: new dal > > On Dec 6, 2010, at 1:15 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > >> I am not sure. There are pros and cons in both cases. >> >> What do you think. > > On balance, I think I'd break it up, but I don't feel strongly about it. It's > a big file, and the extra factoring might help modularity and thus (maybe) > readability. > > It can be useful for a web2py user to read the dal code, since it'll never be > practical to squeeze all its functionality into the book(s). So readability > is important. > > OTOH there's not a constant need for new adapters and such. So.... > >> >> For me it is easier to manage to this way. I tried to break it but it >> would require even more re-factoring and I was not sure it was worth >> it. >> >> Massimo >> >> >> >> On Dec 6, 3:10 pm, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: >>> On Dec 6, 2010, at 12:55 PM, mdipierro wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> 1) The new DAL (dal.py) passes all the tests I have. >>>> 2) The new DAL has integrated GAE support (datastore) without need for >>>> contrib/gql.py >>>> 3) The new DAL is better because more customizable, smaller (10%), and >>>> more readable >>>> 4) The new DAL is one single file and it does not depend on web2py. >>> >>> Have you decided to keep it as a single file, or break it into a package?
