Stefano Masini wrote: <SNIP>
> I wonder how many people (including myself) have implemented their own > versions of such modules, at least once in their pythonic life. I > indeed have my own odict (even same name! :). My own pathutils > (different name, but same stuff). My own validate... and so forth. As someone who implemented their own configuration mini-language with validation, blah, blah, blah (http://www.tundraware.com/Software/tconfpy/) I can give you a number of reasons - all valid for different people at different times: 1) The existing tool is inadequate for the task at hand and OO subclassing is overrated/overhyped to fix this problem. Even when you override base classes with your own stuff, you're still stuck with the larger *architecture* of the original design. You really can't subclass your way out of that, hence new tools to do old things spring into being. 2) It's a learning exercise. 3) You don't trust the quality of the code for existing modules. (Not that *I* have this problem :-p but some people might.) -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
