RetroSearch Browse

Mon Feb 12 02:19:02 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070940.html

Ben North wrote:

>         c.5   uses which would have to stay as "getattr" because they
>               are calls of a variable named "getattr" whose default
>               value is the builtin "getattr";

Have you checked if these are intended to bring the "getattr" name into
local scope for fast lookup, or to force a binding to the builtin
"gettattr" at compile time (two common (ab)uses of default arguments)?
If they are, they would be better served by the new syntax.

Overall,

+1 on obj.(attr_name)
-0 on obj.(attr_name, default_value)

Tim Delaney

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070940.html below:

[Python-Dev] New syntax for 'dynamic' attribute access