Bug: bea/01c
ID : | 01c9a900-61f9-41f7-9b2f-dd8f89e25b1b |
Short name : | bea/01c |
Status : | open |
Severity : | minor |
Assigned : | |
Reporter : | |
Creator : | W. Trevor King <wking@drexel.edu> |
Created : | Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:35:12 +0000 |
Summary : | Need command output abstraction for flexible UIs |
Comment: |
--------- Comment --------- ID: b8e5c376-32a4-42ea-b6b2-adbee069384a Short name: bea/01c/b8e From: "W. Trevor King" <wking@drexel.edu> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:36:46 +0000 On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 01:24:25PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > Of course, incorperating interactive functionality in command output > (i.e. changing the bug target from the bug-show page), doesn't fit > into this model. To do that, we'd have to abstract the default > command output the way we've already abstracted the commands and their > input... Does anyone know of any output-abstraction implementations to look at for inspiration. * How would we handle the options we currently pass through (shortlist, show_comments, etc.)? * Would standard arguments know how to display themselves? class Status (Argument): def str(self, ui, command, *args, **kwargs): ui.display_status(self, command, *args, **kwargs) class Bug (Argument): def str(self, ui, command, *args, **kwargs): ui.display_bug(self, command, *args, **kwargs) ... |
ID: f5139012-e20b-4d24-90a5-10d969ddd364
Short name: bea/01c/f51
From: "W. Trevor King" <wking@drexel.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:24:25 +0000