On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Nick Coghlan <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 Feb 2013 08:14, "Terry Reedy" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I personally think we should skip the bikeshedding over how to avoid >> repeating names to make the bound name match the definition name (as with >> def, class, and import). Actually, they do not have to match and in cases, >> one might want a short bound name for retrieval and a longer definition name >> for display. > > I realised last night that "labelled values" might be a better building > block than "named values". > > I'll see if I can find my old python-ideas posts about the concept > (although, to be honest, I'm not sure it has ever been elaborated much > further than it has in this thread)
Ah, there we go - I created a recipe a couple of years ago showing the basic concept: http://code.activestate.com/recipes/577810-named-values/ Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
