> > Types with constructors that insist on an argument are problematic to > > generic code that tries to instantiate a type by simply calling it. > > Why on earth would you be trying to instantiate something > without having any idea what parameters are required? It could be the other way though: something could have a protocol where you can pass in a factory function that's called without arguments, and maybe you'd like to be able to pass it a built-in type. Something very close to this happened to me when testing Zope 3 filesystem synchronization. --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