> I suspect most of these uses could be replaced fairly easily by the > authors of code that uses them, though it wouldn't be quite as > automatic as for the common symbols. Some could probably just be > deleted. anything that can just be gotten by calling type() might > be a candidate. For some, it should be fairly straightforward to > add appropriate symbols to builtins. 'buffer', 'slice' and 'xrange' > could be replaced by a callable type. Others could be just > non-callable objects that expose the various type objects. Adding > the obvious symbol for 'class' to builtins obviously wouldn't work. Now these are things for which I'd like to see patches! (And the 'string' common basetype.) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4