Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add InstancePropertyHelper and apply_request_extensions #1581

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 17, 2015

Conversation

mmerickel
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@digitalresistor
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@mmerickel
Copy link
Member Author

That little edit to IRequestFactory was because IRequestFactory is a public api and IRequest is apparently not. So I didn't want the private api referenced from the public docstring.

@digitalresistor
Copy link
Member

I had not realised that IRequest is not a public API. Probably because at this point it is excessively large ;-)

@mmerickel
Copy link
Member Author

Well I actually thought it was. But it's private and just a marker interface actually.

mmerickel added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 17, 2015
add InstancePropertyHelper and apply_request_extensions
@mmerickel mmerickel merged commit 6ea099d into master Feb 17, 2015
@mmerickel mmerickel deleted the feature.unittest-request-methods branch February 17, 2015 05:43

After invoking this method, the ``request`` should have the methods
and properties that were defined using
:meth:`pyramid.config.Configurator.add_request_method`.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we document how you would use extensions?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I explicitly left extensions off of the public api documentation. It's there just for pyramid's hot route in the router. The IRequestExtensions interface is private and shouldn't be used/passed-in directly by anyone. We do this in a few other places in the code for testing hooks.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could name it _extensions if it would make you feel better.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants