RetroSearch Browse

Sat Oct 15 06:51:28 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-October/114089.html

Am 15.10.2011 01:32, schrieb Greg Ewing:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> That wouldn't be instead, but in addition - you need the
>> variable name, anyway.
> 
> But the details of exactly how the name is constructed
> could be kept as an implementation detail.

Is there a use case for keeping that detail hidden?

>> Not sure whether there is actually
>> a gain in readability - people not familiar with this would
>> assume that it's a function call of some kind, which it would
>> not be.
> 
> To me the benefit would be that the name you write as
> the argument would be *exactly* the identifier it
> represents.
> 
> If you have to manually add a prefix, there's room for
> a bit of confusion, especially if the prefix itself
> ends with an underscore. E.g. if the identifier is
> "__init__" and the prefix is "PyID_", do you write
> "PyID__init__" (two underscores) or "PyID___init__"
> (three underscores?) And can you easily spot the
> difference in your editor?

The compiler can, very easily.

Georg

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-October/114089.html below:

[Python-Dev] Identifier API