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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #22027 > unrolled thread

Re: Python classes: Simplify?

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: Python classes: Simplify? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-03-22 10:55 -0400

#22027 — Re: Python classes: Simplify?

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:17:35 -0700, Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com>
declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:

> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Steven Lehar <slehar@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Furthermore, why not call the
> > initialization function after the class name as is done in other languages?
> 
> Yech. That would add another step to renaming a class and make
> referring to the superclass initializer method rather difficult. It
> would also break the "all special methods have underscored names"
> rule.
>

	Not to mention the dangling consideration of what to do with the
real constructor: __new__()
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
        wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

[toc] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web