[Zope3-dev] Adapters & Interface Implementations (was Re: [Zope-dev] Cool stuff!)

[Lalo Martins]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 08:12:48AM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> Seriously, though, I find that the term "implementation of an interface" 
> best describes what these things *are*.  I would be comfortable with making 
> the API have a call like: "getImplementation(object, interface, default)", 
> because that is, after all, what you *want*.  An implementation of the 
> desired interface, for that object.  You don't care if the implementation 
> is the original object, an Adapter, a Facade, a Proxy, or god knows what 
> else.  You just want an interface implementation.  From my POV, 
> "getFeature" is poor naming because it is all about *how*, not *what*.  It 
> makes me need to know what a "feature" is in this context -- a 
> Zope-specific term added to my learning curve -- where getImplementation() 
> does not.

All right. Now that I actually *read* the Tutorial, I have to
agree. <feature /> and getFeature() are too different. I'd vote for
<adaptor /> (or facade, proxy, whatever - adaptor is better, IIRC)
and getImplementation().

[]s,
                                               |alo
                                               +----
--
  It doesn't bother me that people say things like
   "you'll never get anywhere with this attitude".
   In a few decades, it will make a good paragraph
      in my biography. You know, for a laugh.
--
http://www.laranja.org/                mailto:lalo@laranja.org
         pgp key: http://www.laranja.org/pessoal/pgp

Brazil of Darkness (RPG)      ---       http://www.BroDar.org/