Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> I meant only the shift from typing "def __iter__(" to "defop iter(",
> irrespective of how it's implemented.
On its own, that's no more than a syntax change,
with very little to recommend it. With the associated
semantics you propose, it's a very deep change indeed.
> My assumption is that a majority
> of Python users would either not care which "magical" spelling was used,
> would like getting rid of the '__',
These are large assumptions, which I suspect are at
least 87.43% wrong. Don't make the mistake of thinking
that everyone has the same preferences as you.
> """Removal of __magic__ attributes
>
> Special attribute names like '__iter__' have been replaced with use of the
> 'defop' keyword, for example, 'defop iter(self)'.
>
> Instead, I'd expect most people to view this as either neutral and of no
> consequence, or as a positive improvement in readability and reduction of
> magic.
If that were all it said, I'd think "!#$#??? Why are they messing
around with something that's not broken?" (i.e. naming of special
methods).
If it went on to talk about generic functions, I'd be very
uncomfortable, because I still have deep reservations about
that whole idea.
--
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury, | Carpe post meridiem! |
Christchurch, New Zealand | (I'm not a morning person.) |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
