RetroSearch Browse

Thu Mar 16 06:20:21 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062451.html

On 3/15/06, Nicolas Fleury <nidoizo at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I think we all agree on this list that there's no point using a
> staticmethod for that use case.  My suggestion was for some
> comp.lang.python people, a lot coming from other languages.  Their
> reflex would be much more to define a staticmethod.  This issue has been
> pointed a lot of times on comp.lang.python.

There's no need to change Python so that people coming from other
languages won't make silly mistakes, is there?

BTW I question the claimed reflex -- assuming by "other languages" you
mean Java or C++ (the only languages I know that *have* static
methods) -- since those languages don't have the ability to call
methods (static or otherwise) at class definition time.

So perhaps you need to dig deeper to find out *why* this is a recurring issue.

--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-March/062451.html below:

[Python-Dev] Making staticmethod objects callable?