[Bioperl-l] 'standard' URL/HTTP handling

Matthew Pocock mrp@sanger.ac.uk
Sun, 24 Sep 2000 17:46:38 +0100

Ewan Birney wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, chris dagdigian wrote:


> Hilmar's suggestion still stands. For IO orientated modules, there are a
> number of IO things each module does, like setting filenames, closing
> streams etc.
> I am not sure how IOManager is set out, but I would like to see in this
> case a true base class (? perhaps IOManager) which IO orientated modules
> in bioperl would inheriet from. This would
>         (a) save people from having to type get/sets for fh/filename all
> the time and
>         (b) make bioperl more consistent.
> For Network orientated modules, something similar might occur or the IO
> system might be good enough.
> Does this sound sane Hilmar? Would you like to propose the system we
> should try to stick to?

Perhaps agregation would be better than inheriting - some modules need to have
access to IO management, so putting that into a single place into a module is
sensible, but mabey the IO modules that use this functionality just need an
IOManager object as a member variable - and there is bound to be one case in
the future when an IO module needs more than one IOManager for something. Also,
there may be some specific case in the future when two objects need access to
the same IOManager resources. This would be problematic if they inherited this
functionality in rather than delegating it.


> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Ewan Birney. Mobile: +44 (0)7970 151230, Work: +44 1223 494420
> <birney@ebi.ac.uk>.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l@bioperl.org
> http://bioperl.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l

Joon: You're out of your tree
Sam:  It wasn't my tree
                                                 (Benny & Joon)