RetroSearch Browse

Mon Jan 14 08:22:09 CET 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076156.html

> Hmm, is that really necessary? structseq has been in use for quite a
> while and this need hasn't come up -- it's been designed to be quite
> compatible with tuple *except* for isinstance checks, and that has
> worked well.

In addition, I would like to suggest that the current structseq usage
is changed to regular classes (perhaps with slots) in Python 3.
structseq was a compatibility mechanism for existing code that assumes
the things returned are tuples, when they are really objects with named
fields.

So for struct stat and struct tm in particular, I think the indexed
access should be removed in Python 3. Whether then structseq needs
to be preserved at all, I don't know.

Regards,
Martin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076156.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r59947 - in python/trunk:Lib/test/test_structseq.py Misc/NEWS