Greg Ewing wrote:
> François Pinard wrote:
>
> > The only practical reason to like this feature is sparing the need of
> > finding an otherwise useless name for the formal argument.
>
> If the argument represents a coherent enough concept
> to be passed in as a tuple in the first place, it
> should be possible to find a meaningful name for it.
> Otherwise the elements should probably be passed in
> as separate arguments.
But sometimes you don't have this option. If I have a class that I'd
like to support an indexing operation like:
obj[x, y]
then the natural __getitem__ signature will look like:
def __getitem__(self, (x, y)):
...
Note that I definitely can't write this as:
def __getitem__(self, x, y):
...
because __getitem__ is always called with a single argument, not two.
Of course, I can give the parameter a name and do the tuple unpacking
manually (e.g. x, y = x_y), but I'm not sure I understand yet what we
gain by making __getitem__ harder to use with tuples.
I guess if tuple unpacking in function parameters goes away, I think
we should change the __getitem__ machinery so that:
obj[x1, x2, ..., xN]
is translated to:
obj.__getitem__(x1, x2, ..., xN)
where __getitem__ would now have to take a *args when called with tuples.
STeVe
--
You can wordify anything if you just verb it.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
_______________________________________________
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
