On 11/22/06, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2) But also, if Python was built with interfaces, "special" methods > would each be in their own namespace. That is, a user wouldn't have > to worry about accidentally overriding a method; they'd have to > explicitly override the "len" method inherited from the "container" > interface; just defining a method called "len" in their subclass > wouldn't do it. CLOS is rather elegant in this respect.
Ow, that's the first time you describe this particular wrinkle. I don't know anything by CLOS. Python has a rather much simpler approach to attribute namespaces for class instances; you can have only one attribute named "len" (since it's contained within a class, most folks consider this sufficient localization to not have to worry about conflicts). I don't think that anyone else here thought of ABCs or interfaces introducing separate namespaces yet. The __special__ namespace is effectively a second namespace, orthogonal to the regular namespace, because there's an explicit convention that you shouldn't define __special__ attributes unless you are implementing whatever semantics a particular __special__ name has. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
