On Jun 7, 2014, at 6:25 AM, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote:
>> I guess I could duck-type it based on the _fields attribute but that >> feels implicit and fragile. >> >> What do you guys suggest? > > I seem to remember a previous discussion that concluded that duck typing > based on _fields was the way to go. (It's a public API, despite the _, > due to name-tuple's attribute namespacing issues.) Yes. That is the recommended approach. IIRC that was Guido's suggestion rather than creating an abstract base class for a named tuple (any tuple-like class with indexable elements that are also accessible using named attributes). Raymond
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
