[albatross-users] Re: load_page_module patch

[Matt Goodall]

Andrew McNamara wrote:

>>Matt> Oh yeah, the patch contains some slightly quirky code. That
>>Matt> class Page stuff is the beginning of an experiment to simplify
>>Matt> the whole page module vs page class thing. I figured that if the
>>Matt> page module loader return a class that acted as a proxy to the
>>Matt> module then some of the other code could be simplified.
>>
>>I think that it might be a good way to manage the code from page
>>modules.  There is no sensible way for the page to be cached
>>otherwise.
>>    
>>
>
>Indeed. But it feels like we're just re-inventing modules..
>
Nah, it's not reinventing modules.

As Dave points out the page wrapper object is convenient for caching but 
Albatross only really cares about sending a certain message 
(page_process, page_display etc) to the page. Whether the page is a 
normal class instance or an object that proxies requests to functions of 
a module shouldn't matter. I admit I haven't had time to test my theory 
but I think the wrapper object approach can simplify the page mixins to 
the point where it's only the page object location (page_load) that 
actually differs.

Anyway, it's obviously up to you what you feel is right. You guys have a 
much better understanding of the "big picture", Perhaps one day I'll 
find time to play with this some more ... not likely in the coming 
months though :(.

Cheers, Matt