[Grok-dev] Making a custom base View class derived from grok.View?

Fernando Correa Neto fcdoth at gmail.com
Wed Jan 2 05:14:33 EST 2008


On Jan 2, 2008 1:54 AM, Brandon Craig Rhodes <brandon at rhodesmill.org> wrote:
> "Jeff Shell" <eucci.group at gmail.com> writes:
> > The class just looks like this:
> >
> > class View(grok.View):
> >     """ Mixture of Grok Views with br.ez Views """
> >     ...
> >
> > Is there an easy way to tell Grok that this is an abstract base View?
> (a) You can append "Base" to the name.  I myself strongly dislike this
>     "feature"; it keeps tripping people up and it doesn't seem to be
>     mentioned anywhere.  But it's one way to get your class ignored.
> (b) You can say "grok.baseclass()" inside the class definition and it
>     will, if I'm thinking straight, be ignored.  I like this.

Cool. Getting it to be ignored by the default grokker is really
something. Any hint on how to get this ignored by the default grokker
and still get it grokked by other custom grokker :) ?
I mean, some more flexibility for the component setup process for
people that who are running in to problems like Jeff just described?


More information about the Grok-dev mailing list