On 19Dec2022 22:45, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Dec 2022 at 22:37, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> But this much (say with a better validator) gets you static type checking,
> syntax highlighting, and inherent documentation of intent.
Any half-way decent static type-checker will immediately fail as soon as
you call a method on this html string, because it will know that the
method returns a vanilla string, not a html string.
But what does it even mean to uppercase an HTML string? Unless you
define that operation specifically, the most logical meaning is
"convert it into a plain string, and uppercase that".
Yes, this was my thought. I've got a few subclasses of builtin types.
They are not painless.
For HTML "uppercase" is a kind of ok notion because the tags are case
insensitive. Notthe case with, say, XML - my personal nagging example is
from KML (Google map markup dialect) where IIRC a "ScreenOverlay" and a
"screenoverlay" both existing with different semantics. Ugh.
So indeed, I'd probably _want_ .upper to return a plain string and have
special methods to do more targetted things as appropriate.
Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au>
_______________________________________________
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/ATFPQTSMGIODXXZA72YFHQULHN3OGR6U/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
