Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #65145 > unrolled thread

Re: __init__ is the initialiser

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: __init__ is the initialiser Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-01-31 17:44 -0500

#65145 — Re: __init__ is the initialiser

On 1/31/14 3:57 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 01/31/2014 12:48 PM, MRAB wrote:
>> On 2014-01-31 19:52, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't we call __init__ the constructor and __new__ the allocator?
>>
>> The advantage of calling it the "initialiser" is that it explains why
>> it's called "__init__".
>
> Hm, yes, good point.  Also, __init__ initializes so it is a good
> choice.   Ignore the names comment in my previous post.

These days, when teaching Python, I'd say, "__init__ is an initializer, 
or constructor."

-- 
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web