why not extending the syntax for classes, too ?
Michael Hudson
mwh at python.net
Mon Feb 10 07:25:33 EST 2003
mis6 at pitt.edu (Michele Simionato) writes:
> > Your idea has a certain inconsistency: in the def the 'filter'
> > callable gets the whole function object. In the class statement the
> > 'filter' gets the bits you need to make the class.
>
> ? Sorry, I do not understand what do you mean :-(
In your idea:
def filter(*args):
print args
def func() is filter:
pass
prints: <function func at 0xXXXXXXXXX>
class C is filter:
pass
prints: ('C', (), {'__module__':'__main__'})
IOW lambda x:x works as a function filter but not as a class filter.
> > It also doesn't chain well, but given your preference of syntax, I
> > guess you don't care :-)
> >
>
> I was thinking to chain with commas, as in
>
> class C is Traced,Profiled,Protected: #etc. etc.
Does that do the moral equivalent of
class _Foo(Traced,Profiled,Protected):
pass
C = _Foo('C', (), {whatever})
?
Cheers,
M.
--
It is time-consuming to produce high-quality software. However,
that should not alone be a reason to give up the high standards
of Python development. -- Martin von Loewis, python-dev
More information about the Python-list
mailing list