I posted same question below yesterday, not sure why it's not posted in the
list ...
Best Regards!
Kevin (Chen) Ji 纪 晨
Engineer, zVM Development, CSTL
Notes: Chen CH Ji/China/IBM@IBMCN Internet: jiche...@cn.ibm.com
Phone: +86-10-82454158
Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian District,
Beijing 100193, PRC
From: Chris Friesen <chris.frie...@windriver.com>
To: <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: 03/13/2015 07:57 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] is it possible to microversion a
static class method?
On 03/12/2015 12:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 03/12/2015 02:03 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm having an issue with microversions.
>>
>> The api_version() code has a comment saying "This decorator MUST appear
>> first (the outermost decorator) on an API method for it to work
correctly"
>>
>> I tried making a microversioned static class method like this:
>>
>> @wsgi.Controller.api_version("2.4") # noqa
>> @staticmethod
>> def _my_func(req, foo):
>>
>> and pycharm highlighted the api_version decorator and complained that
>> "This decorator will not receive a callable it may expect; the built-in
>> decorator returns a special object."
>>
>> Is this a spurious warning from pycharm? The pep8 checks don't
complain.
>>
>> If I don't make it static, then pycharm suggests that the method could
>> be static.
>
> *API method*
>
> This is not intended for use by methods below the top controller level.
> If you want conditionals lower down in your call stack pull the request
> version out yourself and use that.
Both the original spec and doc/source/devref/api_microversions.rst contain
text
talking about decorating a private method. The latter gives this example:
@api_version("2.1", "2.4")
def _version_specific_func(self, req, arg1):
pass
@api_version(min_version="2.5") #noqa
def _version_specific_func(self, req, arg1):
pass
def show(self, req, id):
.... common stuff ....
self._version_specific_func(req, "foo")
.... common stuff ....
It's entirely possible that such a private method might not need to
reference
"self", and could therefore be static, so I think it's a valid question.
Chris
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
