[Zope3-dev] Re: ObjectHub should change data structure

[Philipp von Weitershausen]

Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> If Persistent supplied a slot for this (_p_container?), it'd be doable 
> without any intrusion beyond that already required to support 
> persistence.  But perhaps the ZODB list would need to speak to that issue.

Sounds neat, but I have to ask the stupid question: What's persistence 
got to do with containing? IMO, nada.

>>     o We'd sort of like to allow an object to be able to
>>       have more than one parent.
> 
> Yeah, but we've been sort-of-liking this for what, 5+ years now?  Has 
> anybody actually used this yet?  Maybe it's time to call YAGNI on it.  
> (Maybe *way* past time.)

+1

> Best of all, links between objects in ZODB are trivial, and getting an 
> object's URL is possible.  This would be one less "why the heck doesn't 
> this work the way I expect" in Zope 3.

I think you're hitting the nail on its head here. Throughout Zope3 
development, we have always been trying to come up with use cases and, 
more importantly, actors. I think, yet another time has come where we 
should ask ourselves: what would be more convenient, more 
straight-foward, more easy to understand for the Zope3 developer?

To give an example: While decorators are a very nice feature, they raise 
the level of abstraction tremendously and I doubt that people will use 
them even if we tell them to.

Philipp