RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jan 4 19:47:06 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/050629.html

On Tue, Jan 04, 2005, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>> and the overloading of
>>unbound and bound methods on the same object type is confusing. Also,
>>the type checking offered is wrong, because it checks for subclassing
>>rather than for duck typing.
> 
> duck typing?

"If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck."

Python is often referred to as having duck typing because even without
formal interface declarations, good practice mostly depends on
conformant interfaces rather than subclassing to determine an object's
type.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"19. A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming,
is not worth knowing."  --Alan Perlis

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/050629.html below:

[Python-Dev] Let's get rid of unbound methods