Hi,
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of just
dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we resolve
dotted names to find command classes, command hooks and compilers. So
what’s the benefit, marginally easier parsing?
Regards
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org wrote:
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of just
dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we resolve
dotted names to find command classes, command hooks and compilers. So
what’s the
On 2011-04-15 11:02:17 -0700, Jim Fulton said:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Éric Araujo
mer...@netwok.org wrote:
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of just
dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we resolve
dotted names to find command classes,
At 02:02 PM 4/15/2011 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org wrote:
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of just
dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we resolve
dotted names to find command classes,
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org wrote:
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of just
dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we resolve
dotted names to find command classes, command hooks and compilers.
I advocated using
On 06:22 pm, al...@gothcandy.com wrote:
On 2011-04-15 11:02:17 -0700, Jim Fulton said:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org
wrote:
As an aside, I wonder why people use dot+colon notation instead of
just dots to reference callables. In distutils2 for example we
At 04:11 PM 4/15/2011 -0400, Fred Drake wrote:
These end users don't really care if the object identified is a class or
function in module, a nested attribute on a class, or anything else, so
long as it does what it's advertised to do. By not pushing implementation
details into the identifier,
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:06 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
That would be one advantage of using entry points instead. ;-) (i.e., the
user doesn't specify the object location, the package author does.)
Definitely! I'm certainly all in favor of having something very akin to entry
