At 10:26 AM 9/29/2007 -0500, Michael Urman wrote: >[Sending direct because this is just a thanks and some idea fodder, >but feel free to return this to the list] > >On 9/29/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > can both be constants, a simple list.index() test could now raise a > > TypeError, as could "item in list". > >Good point - I keep missing the forest for the trees. This isn't just >a matter of dicts; any collection type can be susceptible. Thanks for >this reminder. > >I'm torn on your idea of making a read vs readinto separation of >files. If this works by, e.g., raising IOError on attempt to use the >wrong one, the use case you proposed will be filtering out a ton of >expected exceptions, but it's easy to understand the behavior. > >If it works by removing the wrong method from the object, then we've >got two different file-like object types returned from the same >function based on the value of an argument (but a better LBYL check >available). Of course since we currently have two different types >returned from a method based on a value passed to its constructor, >this may be no worse. > >I'm not sure which way makes it easier to add new file-like-objects, >either; they'll have the same problems.
They'll have the same problems *anyway*. In fact, having different methods will simply force people creating such objects to decide what they're really trying to do. _______________________________________________ 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
