[redirecting back to list]
On 07/24/2017 04:19 AM, Michel Desmoulin wrote:
Le 24/07/2017 à 13:02, Ethan Furman a écrit :
On 07/23/2017 10:47 AM, Michel Desmoulin wrote:
I'm not sure why everybody have such a grip on the type.
If I understand the goal of "a new namedtuple" correctly, it is not to
come up with yet another namedtuple type -- it is to make the existing
collections.namedtuple a faster experience, and possibly add another way
to create such a thing.
This means that the "replacement" namedtuple MUST be backwards
compatible with the existing collections.namedtuple, and keeping track
of type is one of the things it does:
Is it ? Maybe we should check that, cause we may be arguing around a "nice to
have" for nothing.
Um, yes, it is. Did you not read the section you snipped? [1]
How many people among those intereted by the proposal have a strong need for
the type ?
Whether there is a strong need for it is largely irrelevant; it's there now, it needs to stay. If we were to remove it
there would need to be a strong need for what we gain and that it outweighs the broken backward compatibility commitment
that we try very hard to maintain.
--
~Ethan~
[1] My apologies for the first paragraph if this is a language translation issue and you were talking about the
backwards compatibility and not the type tracking.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
