On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 13:31:20 -0700, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Carlos Ribeiro wrote: > > On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:50:53 -0700, Steven Bethard > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Michael Spencer wrote: > >> > >>>We could use __add__, instead for combining namespaces > >> > >>I don't think this is a good idea. For the same reasons that dicts > >>don't have an __add__ (how should attributes with different values be > >>combined?), I don't think Bunch/Namespace should have an __add__. > > > > For entirely unrelated reasons I did it for a bunch-like class of > > mine, and called it 'merge'. For this particular application it was a > > better name than update and append, but that's IMHO. > > Did 'merge' have the same semantics as the 'update' being discussed? > That is, did it modify the first 'bunch'? Or did it create a new > 'bunch'? To me, 'merge' sounds more like the second...
In my particular example it was more like the second, but it doesn't apply exactly because the goal was a little bit different; I implemented it to merge two configuration dictionaries, one being the 'base' (with default values) and the other one with values to overrride the base values. Anyway, it was just a suggestion; and while I don't think that merge really implies one behavior over the other, having it as a constructor does make sense... -- Carlos Ribeiro Consultoria em Projetos blog: http://rascunhosrotos.blogspot.com blog: http://pythonnotes.blogspot.com mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
