On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 01:13:28PM -0800, Michael Chermside wrote: > Haven't we learned from regrets over the .next() method of iterators > that all "magically" invoked methods should be named using the __xxx__ > pattern? Shouldn't it be named __on_missing__() instead?
I agree that on_missing should be __missing__ (or __missing_key__) but I don't agree on the claim that all 'magically' invoked methods should be two-way-double-underscored. __methods__ are methods that should only be called 'magically', or by the object itself. 'next' has quite a few usecases where it's desireable to call it directly (and I often do.) -- Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! _______________________________________________ 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
