Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #65166
| Date | 2014-01-31 18:35 -0800 |
|---|---|
| From | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
| Subject | Re: __init__ is the initialiser |
| References | (1 earlier) <lcgut2$b8r$1@ger.gmane.org> <858utviwgs.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <lchce7$44q$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.6233.1391214984.18130.python-list@python.org> <roy-EDB0E1.20104631012014@news.panix.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.6244.1391222132.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 01/31/2014 05:10 PM, Roy Smith wrote: > In article <mailman.6233.1391214984.18130.python-list@python.org>, > Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > >> I found calling __init__ the constructor very confusing. > > I've heard many people say this, and it's always sort of befuddled me. I have never learned C++, so I don't know its screwy semantics. ;) Nor Java, for that matter. -- ~Ethan~
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: __init__ is the initialiser Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-01-31 16:13 -0800
Re: __init__ is the initialiser Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-01-31 20:10 -0500
Re: __init__ is the initialiser MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-02-01 01:41 +0000
Re: __init__ is the initialiser Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-01-31 20:53 -0500
Re: __init__ is the initialiser Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-01-31 18:35 -0800
Dunder [was Re: __init__ is the initialiser] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-02-01 02:52 +0000
Re: Dunder [was Re: __init__ is the initialiser] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-02-01 03:04 +0000
Re: Dunder [was Re: __init__ is the initialiser] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-01 15:05 +1100
Re: Dunder [was Re: __init__ is the initialiser] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-02-01 05:53 +0000
csiph-web