At 12:05 AM 3/5/2006 +0300, Oleg Broytmann wrote: >On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > > At 09:34 AM 3/4/2006 -0800, Anna Ravenscroft wrote: > > >I think this is a really good point. next() is supposed to get used, by > > >coders, in regular code - so it shouldn't be __next__. I can understand > > >the desire for both forms, although that seems it would clutter things up > > >unnecessarily - particularly if the two do the same thing. > > > > By this argument, we should be using ob.len() instead of len(ob), and > > ob.iter() instead of iter(ob). > > Yes, I think it'd be more consistent and more object-oriented.
I'm not sure that "more object-oriented" should be equated with "good" in this context, or indeed any context. :) A function is no more or less polymorphic than a method in any case, especially if the function is normally delegating to a slot or special method in any case. _______________________________________________ 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
