On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Gary Poster <email address hidden> wrote:
> Stub's suggestion is pragmatic if not precise. I'm OK with it.
>
> Is there a root Storm class (not interface) we can use instead? IIRC,
> that should work as well. If it doesn't, we can use zcml to slam an
> interface on the root Storm class, and make the adapter work off of that
> interface.
Last time I tried I couldn't do it. There appears to be no way to say
that the Storm and all its subclasses implements an Interface.
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Gary Poster <email address hidden> wrote:
> Stub's suggestion is pragmatic if not precise. I'm OK with it.
>
> Is there a root Storm class (not interface) we can use instead? IIRC,
> that should work as well. If it doesn't, we can use zcml to slam an
> interface on the root Storm class, and make the adapter work off of that
> interface.
Last time I tried I couldn't do it. There appears to be no way to say
that the Storm and all its subclasses implements an Interface.
-- www.stuartbisho p.net/
Stuart Bishop <email address hidden>
http://