Jp Calderone wrote: > If you use vars(self).update(locals()), it even looks halfway > pleasant ;) I'm not sure what python-dev's current opinion of > vars(obj) is though (I'm hoping someone'll tell me).
http://docs.python.org/lib/built-in-funcs.html#l2h-76 is pretty clear: vars([object]) Without arguments, return a dictionary corresponding to the current local symbol table. With a module, class or class instance object as argument (or anything else that has a __dict__ attribute), returns a dictionary corresponding to the object's symbol table. The returned dictionary should not be modified: the effects on the corresponding symbol table are undefined. > Of course, both of these fall over for __slots__'ful classes. It'd be > nice if there were a general way to deal with attributes of an > instance, regardless of the implementation details of its memory > layout. I agree. Ideally I'd like this class grouping: __slots__ = True def __init__(self, .x, .y, .z): pass to be equivalent to: class grouping: __slots__ = ["x", "y", "z"] def __init__(self, x, y, z): self.x = x del x self.y = y del y self.z = z del z Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
