On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:11:27 -0200, Gabriel Genellina wrote: > En Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:05:32 -0200, Mikael Olofsson <mik...@isy.liu.se> > escribió: ... >> If I ever wanted __str__ and __repr__ to return the same thing, I would >> make them equal: >> >> def __str__(self): >> return 'whatever you want' >> __repr__ = __str__ >> >> That makes it more obvious to me what's going on. As a bonus, it saves >> one method call for every repr call. > > It's even easier to define only __repr__, __str__ defaults to it:
Easier, yes, but less obvious. I can never remember whether __repr__ calls __str__ or __str__ calls __repr__ if one or the other is missing. And it costs a failed method lookup. The method lookup is a micro-optimization, and therefore not important, but as far as I'm concerned the extra clarity of doing __repr__ = __str__ is valuable. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
