RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jan 28 02:31:55 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/051330.html

Steven Bethard wrote:

> Fernando Perez wrote:
>> Steven Bethard wrote:
>> > I'm probably not willing to budge much on adding dict-style methods --
>> > if you want a dict, use a dict.  But if people think they're
>> > necessary, there are a few methods from Struct that I wouldn't be too
>> > upset if I had to add, e.g. clear, copy, etc.  But I'm going to need
>> > more feedback before I make any changes like this.
>> 
>> You already have update(), which by the way precludes a bunch storing an
>> 'update' attribute.
> 
> Well, actually, you can have an update attribute, but then you have to
> call update from the class instead of the instance:

[...]

Of course, you are right.

However, I think it would perhaps be best to advertise any methods of Bunch as
strictly classmethods from day 1.  Otherwise, you can have:

b = Bunch()
b.update(otherdict) -> otherdict happens to have an 'update' key

... more code

b.update(someotherdict) -> boom! update is not callable

If all Bunch methods are officially presented always as classmethods, users can
simply expect that all attributes of a bunch are meant to store data, without
any instance methods at all.

Regards,

f

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/051330.html below:

[ 1094542 ] add Bunch type to collections module