Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Boris Borcic a écrit :
Given the ABC innovation, maybe an infix syntax for isinstance() would
be good.
Possibilities :
- stealing "is" away from object identity. As a motivation, true use
cases for testing object identity are rare;
"x is None" is a *very* common test. (...)
Testing a class identity often happens when writing metaclasses
This kind-of-talks for Terry's proposition : adding a __contains__ to
type,
I said "type identity testing", not isinstance() or issubclass() testing.
Yes, but in the thread's context [of choosing between "is" and "in" as infix
syntax for isinstance()] you were in effect raising as an objection to the first
choice that it meant conflict with this use case [of "type identity testing"
which is "common when writing metaclasses"].
This implied "writing metaclasses" as a background experience to decide the
issue, what in turn implied a preference for the second solution ("x in Number")
on *two* counts.
First because it was a proposed alternative to what you were objecting to, and
Second because "x in Number" has this most simple "metaclassy" solution.
(...)
And anyway, I don't see how any of the above address the point that your
premise that "true identity testing is rare" is just wrong...
I wrote "true use cases for identity testing are rare", it was more of an
auxiliary assertion that a premise, and nothing you objected really disproved it
(for an adequate definition of "true use case").
* writing metaclasses is rare, and so is testing class identity in its context.
* "x is None" is arguably not a "true use case", in the sense that it is a case
of testing identity against a constant that
- doesn't compare equal to anything else
- is the single instance of a singleton class
so that there exists both an equality test and an isinstance() test that are
equivalents to the identity test.
Cheers, BB
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
