Le 14/09/2017 à 19:24, Mike Miller a écrit : > > On 2017-09-12 21:05, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> It's ironic that some people dislike "data classes" because these are >> regular classes, not just for data, while others are proposing >> alternative names that emphasize the data container aspect. So "data >> classes" splits the difference, by referring to both data and classes. > > True that these data-classes will be a superset of a traditional > record. But, we already have objects and inheritance for those use > cases. The data-class is meant to be used primarily like a record, so > why not name it that way?
Because given how convenient it is, it will most probably becomes the default way to write classes in Python. Not just for record. Everybody end up wishing for a less verbose way to write day to day classes after a while. _______________________________________________ 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
