On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Paul Prescod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, could the types module be renamed "builtin_classes" or > "core_classes" or something like that? It was always a weird name > because it wasn't if it contained all of the types in a Python > distribution. Just a set of core-to-the-implementation ones.
That's up to the stdlib reorg committee; my position has been for a long time that there shouldn't be a types module at all. > Just out of curiousity: why is the type(x) function valuable when > x.__class__ is a viable alternative and has been one for a long time. They aren't the same though. __class__ is overridable via __getattr__. type() is not. -- --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
