Fwd: [Nipy-devel] attributes vs. traits

[Karl Young]

> I agree with Karl and Brian that the code as it is needs work. I just 
> don't think that traits is the source of the problem: that would be 
> me..... I think this period of going through the clunky but 
> semi-functioning code I wrote was to be expected, but I just don't 
> want us to get rid of traits because I used it poorly.


er, I certainly didn't want to imply that you were the problem, just 
that we have the same problems that face any fledgling collaborative 
package and maybe trying to absorb some of the pain earlier rather than 
later would be helpful - re. traits I was pretty convinced by Brian's 
bloat, non-native python, and lack of readonly arguments (and the fact 
that though they seemed kind of handy I didn't really get why enthought 
was pushing them as such a big deal) but Jonathan and Fernando's 
comebacks re. trying to capitalize on enthoughts (maybe not always ideal 
but) considerable efforts as well considering to what extent others 
adopt them are pretty important considerations. After surviving less 
than ideal code by other scientists that I wouldn't have had time to 
write myself, I may be leaning back towards sticking with traits (though 
I think Fernando's idea of going to the source and discussing it with 
the enthought guys is an excellent suggestion). 

-- 

Karl Young
Center for Imaging of Neurodegenerative Diseases, UCSF          
VA Medical Center (114M)              Phone:  (415) 221-4810 x3114  lab        
4150 Clement Street                   FAX:    (415) 668-2864
San Francisco, CA 94121               Email:  karl young at ucsf edu