Proposal: Syntax for attribute initialisation in __init__ methods

[dn]

On 17/04/2022 09.20, Sam Ezeh wrote:
>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but what functionality or advantage(s)
>> does this give, over data-classes?
> 
> One advantage is maintaining control over the __init__ function without
> having to write extra code to do so. In the linked discussion from
> python-ideas, it was mentioned that keyword-only and positional-only
> arguments can't be used with dataclasses [1].
> 
>> Maybe Dataclasses are not being used as much as one might hope, but they
>> are relatively new, and many Python-Masters simply carry-on constructing
>> classes the way they have for years...
> 
> I think one concern I have is that even if this is useful, it might
> still fall to the same fate.


Don't be discouraged by that - and that thread was not the first of such
discussions! The way Python is being applied is continually changing...

I'm not sure about the criticism of dataclasses though. Starting with
'explicit over implicit', once a parameter-list is more than two or
three long, shouldn't we be using 'labels' in order to avoid (potential)
confusion, ie keyword-parameters?

This removes the order/sequence of arguments from the list of potential
problems/gotchas one can fall into!

In which case, I'm wondering just how often the criticism applies 'in
real life'?

So, now the question becomes: what are the cases/examples which
require/desire improvement over the 'traditional' __init__ of
attributes, and facilities offered through dataclasses?
-- 
Regards,
=dn