| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 2011-08-16 23:51, Stuart Bishop wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Gary Poster<gary.poster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Aug 16, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Jonathan Lange wrote:On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Jeroen Vermeulen<jtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That said, ZCA probably ought to do a check like that on registration.And slow the startup further? I'd vote no. This is something that historically has belonged in tests, and I think it should stay there.If you know the internals, it would probably a 5 line test to check that every registered utility provides its interface. And a few extra lines to fix the test fallout... :-)
I suspect we might find rather more failures.BTW agree with Gary that this is not something to insert into registration. Startup time is getting to be a serious pain¹.
Maybe I should just try this and see how many errors I find. What to do next depends on how bad the situation is:
If (virtually) no complaints: (fix problems, and) add the check to the test suite.
Lots of complaints: run check, poke people to fix their interfaces, repeat, add to test suite. I'd be happy to do that.
Drowning in complaints: either fix interfaces, or build a ratcheteer/spambot to make us drive them down to zero.
Jeroen —¹) Yes, I _have_ tried profiling and optimizing registration before complaining. ☺
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
