[Dev] place for utility classes/functions?

[Philippe Bossut]

Creating a chandler/util place is a good idea and has my vote.
- Anyone opposed?
- Who's going to implement?

Cheers,
- Philippe

Morgen Sagen wrote:

> Yep, I agree with Heikki that tools should be for scripts outside of 
> chandler, and something like "util" should be for helper modules.  So 
> tools/timing.py (if it's still useful) would be moved to util/timing.py.
>
> On Apr 26, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Heikki Toivonen wrote:
>
>> I would vote against tools in this case. IMO tools is something that is
>> not needed by Chandler itself when it is running, but some external
>> scripts (maybe tweak repo outside of Chandler or something).
>> Unfortunately we already have chandler/tools folder that contains stuff
>> required to run Chandler itself - I'd vote to move that elsewhere once
>> we decide where that should be.
>>
>> I think Alec's examples would rather go into chandler/util(s), or
>> chandler/lib(s) or something like that - neither of which we have yet.
>>
>> Mike Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> In the past python only code like that has been placed in 
>>> chandler/tools/
>>> On Apr 26, 2005, at 12:01 PM, Alec Flett wrote:
>>>     So I've been poking around with the Python Cookbook and found a few
>>>     recipes that are vastly simplifying my code... (namely
>>>     CachedAttribute and frange, which does floating-point xrange-style
>>>     ranges) and I have a few of my own (CopyOnWrite, etc)
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>   Heikki Toivonen
>>
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev