The following, modulo a pronoun shift were exactly the words I was
sitting down to type.
> I am not designing a programming language, I am designing an application.
That is why, to me, the advice offerred to date seems quite far off the mark.
> And bingo - for that application I need them to be more objects than values.
So, is there a problem with wrapping them thus:
###
class mcx(object):
def __init__(self,val):
self.val = complex(val)
def __add__(self,other):
""" and similarly for most other special methods """
return self.val.__add__(other)
###
I think Arthur would duckishly call this a mutable complex type and
others would more formally call it an object containing a reference to
an immutable complex type and we could all live happily ever after. If
I am right then the vast verbiage expended on this thread so far
deflates into exactly nothing.
If this is inadequate for anyone, what exactly is the problem?
mt
_______________________________________________
Edu-sig mailing list
Edu-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
