On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 18:31:55 -0700, Fernando Perez <fperez.net at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
That sounds reasonable to me. I'll fix update to be a staticmethod.
If people want other methods, I'll make sure they're staticmethods
too.[1]
Steve
[1] In all the cases I can think of, staticmethod is sufficient -- the
methods don't need to access any attributes of the Bunch class. If
anyone has a good reason to make them classmethods instead, let me
know...
--
You can wordify anything if you just verb it.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
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