On 2012-04-09 15:20, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
The argument was to use the name of the type returned as the attribute
name instead of the function. That is not my proposal. The suggested
case is to be able to use a different name to build the same attribute,
to be more intuitive.
i.e. both area and square create the Area attribute, but square only
takes one parameter because it's a square. Kind of like saying "the area
is square".
So my counter point above is in the context that the type name of the
return value becomes the attribute name.
-Steve
Aha, I see.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
