[Edu-sig] FW: Properties use case

[Arthur]

My response to something Grégoire sent me this off-list is below.  My
off-list response to him bounced.  I see no reason why he would mind me
posted it up so I take the liberty to do so.  Apologies if Grégoire feels
otherwise.  Not something I generally like to do, but see no reason in this
case why he would be all sensitive to it.

Art 

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Arthur [mailto:ajsiegel at optonline.com] 
> >Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:29 AM
> >To: 'Grégoire Dooms'; 'Arthur'
> >Subject: RE: [Edu-sig] Properties use case
> >
> > 
> >
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: Grégoire Dooms [mailto:dooms at info.ucl.ac.be]
> >> >>   
> >> >What is the question you ask here ? Do you want a 
> >certification that 
> >> >you have done your PyGeo The Right Way (tm) ?
> >
> >No. I see no issues and have some confidence in my overall 
> >design.  People with more depth on some of these issues than 
> >I seem to be concerned that I am overconfident.  I am simply 
> >trying to understand better why.
> >
> >*I* raised none of these questions.  I raised what I 
> >understood to be a very specific, and - yes - technical 
> >issue about Numeric's typing mechanism.  *I think* that *if* 
> >Numeric were to accept my custom type as a pseudo-complex 
> >type rather than something as general as a Python object, 
> >and processed it *as if* it were equivalent to a Python 
> >complex primitive, no harm would come to the calculations 
> >being performed and my ideas for the design I am pursuing, 
> >and am generally comfortable with, would proceed in an 
> >optimal manner.  I am not *sure* that this is true. But even 
> >that question is not the question I raised. I was simply 
> >hoping to get far enough to be able to get some sense of 
> >whether it is true. I would be curious to learn why it is 
> >not, if it is not.  But have no way of learning that if it 
> >is not even implementable.
> >
> >My question whether was and is  - Is anyone aware, or 
> >could imagine, a mechanism that would allow me to coerce 
> >Numeric to process my custom type as a complex primitive 
> >while maintaining object identity?  
> >
> >I have taken the silence as a *no*, a not terribly 
> >surprising *no*,  and have begun to think about the 
> >implications of that *no* on my overall thinking about my 
> >overall design.   
> >
> >I take reasonability for my design, but feel it not 
> >responsible to look-the-other-way when folks more 
> >experienced than I seem to have reasons to doubt its 
> >integrity - from the little I have said about it.  Doubts 
> >have been raised and I am not looking-other-other-way.
> >
> >> >How do you store the dependency graph  ? Is it cycle free (a
> >> >DAG) ? How do you decide which objects need to be 
> >repainted when an 
> >> >other object is changed ? What is the overall design of the 
> >> >application ?
> >
> >Other then not knowing what a DAG is, I feel that the other 
> >issues you raise are under control in some reasonable way.  
> >Part of the Fun (tm) of doing PyGeo has been not just to 
> >find my way to solutions - first I needed to find my way to 
> >the issues.  Eventually the issues seem to identify 
> >themselves, and in general the one's you raise have done so.
> >
> >Nothing yet (before these discussions) raised to me the 
> >issue of the thread safety of my geometric objects.  
> >Therefore I have not considered it to be an issue.
> >
> >I call the style in which I have approached the development 
> >of PyGeo - tongue-in-cheek - Naïve Programming.  It's been a 
> >fascinating experience.
> >
> >But I am sincerely trying to inquire whether there could be 
> >something fundamental I have missed by this approach - only 
> >because the issue has been raised - presumably sincerely - 
> >by others. Perhaps it is so subtle as to be unidentifiable 
> >except under Extreme Circumstances (tm).  Perhaps it doesn't exist.
> >
> >> >> No I do not lock my circle.
> >> >>   
> >> >Do you use threads ?
> >
> >In one sense, and it depends.
> >
> >There is the *option* of running a TK control panel that 
> >provides functioning to control more aspects of the 
> >interactivity with the rendering window than can be 
> >controlled directly from the rendering window itself.  These 
> >are more in the nature of changing some global settings 
> >on-the-fly, then they are about interactivity with the 
> >rendering and interactivity on a micro-second by 
> >micro-second basis - which, whether the control panel option 
> >is or is not selected - run together in one thread. In my 
> >conception of what is taking place, at least.
> >
> >Thanks for your interest in my question/dilemma.
> >
> >> >Best,
> >> >--
> >> >Grégoire
> >> >
> >> >