Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:not': 0.03; 'syntax': 0.04; 'acceptance.': 0.09; 'from:addr:ethan': 0.09; 'from:addr:stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'from:name:ethan furman': 0.09; 'latter': 0.09; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'message-id:@stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'subject:Why': 0.09; 'variant': 0.09; '~ethan~': 0.09; 'developer': 0.10; 'python': 0.11; 'bug': 0.12; 'changes': 0.15; 'attributes,': 0.16; 'piotr': 0.16; 'received:67.18.44': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'subject:accessing': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; '>>>': 0.22; 'code,': 0.22; 'tests': 0.22; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'tracker': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'raise': 0.29; 'too.': 0.31; 'subject:with': 0.35; 'done.': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'unit': 0.37; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'issue': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'sure': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'reviewed': 0.60; 'received:173': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'save': 0.62; 'high': 0.63; 'more': 0.64; 'approved': 0.65; 'subject:there': 0.68; 'obvious': 0.74; 'subject:being': 0.84 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 19:05:14 -0800 From: Ethan Furman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Why is there no natural syntax for accessing attributes with names not being valid identifiers? References: <15912943-29a1-4365-b027-7bb8cec447f8@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator3304.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - python.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - stoneleaf.us X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 173.12.184.233 X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([173.12.184.233]) [173.12.184.233]:42277 X-Source-Auth: ethan+stoneleaf.us X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: dG9idWs7dG9idWs7Z2F0b3IzMzA0Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20= X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 25 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1386212708 news.xs4all.nl 2874 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:48559 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:61073 On 12/04/2013 06:58 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 12/4/2013 3:46 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote: >> On 04/12/2013 20:35, Piotr Dobrogost wrote: >>> >>> there should be a variant of dot access allowing to access >>> these "non-standard" named attributes, too. > > More opinion. I am sure that I am not the only developer who disagrees. +1 >> The obvious thing to do is to either raise this on python ideas, or if >> you're that confident about it raise an issue on the bug tracker with a >> patch, which would include changes to unit tests and documentation as >> well as code, get it reviewed and approved and Bob's your uncle, job >> done. > > I think the latter would be foolish. Syntax changes have a high bar for acceptance. They should do more than save a few > keystrokes. +1 -- ~Ethan~