On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 01:07:06 -0700, Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really would like to see such a class in the stdlib, as it's something that
pretty much everyone ends up rewriting. I certainly don't claim my
implementation to be a good reference (it isn't). But perhaps it can be
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 02:01:20 -0500, James Y Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basically, I'd like to see them be given a binding somewhere, and have
their claimed module agree with that, but am not particular as to
where. Option #2 seemed to be rejected last time, and option #1 was
given
[James Y Knight]
Basically, I'd like to see them be given a binding somewhere, and
have
their claimed module agree with that, but am not particular as to
where. Option #2 seemed to be rejected last time, and option #1 was
given approval, so that's what I wrote a patch for. It sounds like
Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven Bethard is proposing a new collection class named Bunch. I had
a few suggestions which I attached as comments to the patch - but what
is really required is a bit more work on the draft PEP, and then
James Y Knight wrote:
Sooo should (for 'generator' in objects that claim to be in
__builtins__ but aren't),
1) 'generator' be added to __builtins__
2) 'generator' be added to types.py and its __module__ be set to 'types'
3) 'generator' be added to newmodule.py and its __module__ be set to
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Other than a vague feeling of completeness is there any reason this
needs to be done? Is there anything useful that currently cannot be
expressed without this new module?
That I wonder myself, too.
Regards,
Martin
___
Steven Bethard wrote:
Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My feeling about this is that if the name of the attribute is held in
a variable, you should be using a dict, not a Bunch/Struct. If you
have a Bunch/Struct and decide you want a dict instead, you can just
use vars:
py b =
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:31:55 -0700, Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I think it would perhaps be best to advertise any methods of Bunch as
strictly classmethods from day 1. Otherwise, you can have:
b = Bunch()
b.update(otherdict) - otherdict happens to have an 'update' key
Thanks!!!
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:16:19 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Update of /cvsroot/python/python/dist/src/Lib/idlelib
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv5316
Modified Files:
EditorWindow.py NEWS.txt config-keys.def configHandler.py
Log
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 17:24, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Other than a vague feeling of completeness is there any reason this
needs to be done? Is there anything useful that currently cannot be
expressed without this new module?
That I wonder myself, too.
One
10 matches
Mail list logo
