On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 4:44 PM Eric V. Smith <e...@trueblade.com> wrote:
> I don't think this is justifiable as built-in behavior. Just rename your > function "t", then you can write t(x=12, y=16). If nothing else, a good way to prototype it and see if folks like it. I agree that there may be little reason to make this part of the builtin tuple. > That fact that it's not > typing friendly is definitely as strike against it, in my opinion. > not in my opinion -- Python is not a statically typed language, I will be really sad if the future of Python development was motivated by ease of static typing. Now that I think about, namedtupled are not typing friendly either -- part of their point is that you can use one everywhere a tuple is expected. As soon as you type something as expecting a particular namedtuple, you've just broken that. As for the memory growth -- would it need to be a new type? yes, namedtuples are types, but could we have a "tuple_with_attribute_names" that wasn't a distinct type, but rather, dynamically accessed its fields? I suppose that would be a lot heavier weight than a tuple, so maybe the same issue. -CHB -- Christopher Barker, PhD (Chris) Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/6WFONXZNRHUT4EE2KN2U6K5E7B77TQDH/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
