On 15/03/2011 07:59, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Eric Smith<eric at trueblade.com> wrote: >> The field names are not always under direct control of the developer, such >> as when they are database column names. Not that using _replace completely >> gets rid of this problem, but I agree with Raymond's decision that a field >> name can be any valid identifier not starting with an underscore. It's the >> simplest thing for the developer using namedtuple. > While I actually think the current API design is a decent compromise, > another option to consider would be to move the underscore to the > *end* (as_dict_, replace_, make_) as is sometimes done for code that > needs to avoid conflicting with a keyword. > > Namespace collisions with actual fields would remain unlikely, while > pydoc would pick up the new names correctly. > Although it's a backwards incompatible change. Teaching pydoc to recognise the private methods isn't. Michael > Cheers, > Nick. > -- http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ May you do good and not evil May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others May you share freely, never taking more than you give. -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
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