----- Original Message ----- > 2012/9/13 Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>: > > > > Nothing shocking right here imo. It looks like a classic > > parent-child implementation. > > However it seems the relation between Obj and Dependent are 1-to-1. > > Since Dependent need to access all Obj attributes, are you sure > > that Dependent and Obj are not actually the same class ? > > > > > > JM > > Yes well the main class is already big enough, and the relation is > 1-1 > but the dependent class can be also considered separate to split > things more nicely.. > > So I think it will stay like this for now and see how it goes. >
Difficult to say given the meaningless names you provided. Just in case, you can still split things nicely in 2 classes and still get Dependent to be the same thing than Obj : by inheritance. It is a common way to extend one class's features. class Obj class Dependent(Obj) But do it only if Dependent **is** actually an Obj. If Dependent not an Obj but part of an Obj, then your original implementation is probably the way to go. JM -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
