n Jul 7, 2004, at 4:46 PM, orbitz wrote: > Terry Reedy wrote: > >> "François Pinard" <pinard at iro.umontreal.ca> wrote in message >> news:20040707183033.GA30577 at alcyon.progiciels-bpi.ca... >> >>> I perceived the introduction of `file()' as a nice cleanup in Python. >> >> As a user, so did I. I like the cosistency of using file along with >> int, >> tuple, list, dict, type, (and did I leave out something), and all user >> classes as constructors of instances of themselves. > I considered more as the action being performed. I'm opening > something, in this case a file. And now I have an object which has > been opened, I can perform operations on it, and when I'm done I close > it. But you also open sockets, pipes, applications, bank accounts, etc. "open" seems seriously ambiguous to me, and it's not a "generic" function like len or iter. The only good reason I see is to associate "open" with files is because that's just how it's always been done in Python and C. -bob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2357 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20040707/6c5022c0/smime.bin
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