[Python-Dev] Py2.6 ideas

[Delaney, Timothy (Tim)]

skip at pobox.com wrote:

>     >> Hm, but why would they still have to be tuples? Why not just
>     have a >> generic 'record' class?
> 
>     Tim> Hmm - possibilities. "record" definitely has greater
>     connotations Tim> of heterogeneous elements than "tuple", which
>     would put paid to the Tim> constant arguments that "a tuple is
> really just an immutable list". 
> 
> (What do you mean by "... put paid ..."?  It doesn't parse for me.) 
> Based on posts the current thread in c.l.py with the improbable
> subject "f---ing typechecking", lots of people refuse to believe
> tuples are anything other than immutable lists.

Sorry - "put paid to" means "to finish" ...
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/293200.html

That thread is a perfect example why I think a "record" type should be
standard in python, and "tuple" should be deprecated (and removed in
3.0).

Instead, have mutable and immutable lists, and mutable and immutable
records. You could add a mutable list and an immutable list (resulting
always in a new mutable list I think). You could *not* add two records
together (even if neither had named elements).

Cheers,

Tim Delaney