Python classes: Simplify?

[Andrea Crotti]

On 03/22/2012 10:51 AM, Steven Lehar wrote:
> It seems to me that the Python class system is needlessly confusing. 
> Am I missing something?
>
> For example in the class Complex given in the documentation
>
> *class Complex:*
> *    def __init__(self, realpart, imagpart):*
> *        self.r = realpart*
> *        self.i = imagpart*
> *
> *
> *x = Complex(3.0, -4.5)*
>
> I initially found it profoundly confusing that __init__( ) calls for 3 
> arguments, but you call Complex( ) with 2. Furthermore, why not call 
> the initialization function after the class name as is done in other 
> languages? Isn't that the simplest conceptually? Demonstrating with 
> the above example:
>
> *class Complex:*
> *    def Complex(realpart, imagpart):*
> *        Complex.r = realpart*
> *        Complex.i = imagpart*
> *
> *
> *x = Complex(3.0, -4.5)*
> *
> *
> Is there a good reason why classes cannot be defined that way? 
> (Besides the problem of backward-compatibility)
>

Some time ago I saw some nasty hack that allowed you to drop the self in 
the method declaration,
using some crazy metaclass trick, but that's really not a good idea ;)

I agree that is counter-intuitive but just set your editor to do that 
for you and you will be fine..

in my emacs
- s TAB -> self
- . TAB -> self.
- m TAB -> def ${1:method}(self$2):
                          $0

so I never actually write the self..
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20120322/9d29a0be/attachment-0001.html>