> Bill Janssen wrote: > > Calling a method on an object doesn't seem like duck-typing to > > me, though. > > It's duck typing in the sense that you don't have to > formally declare the object as conforming to some > interface before you can call the method.
Oh, OK. I'm against (mandatory) type declarations. However, I do believe that the object's type should have to include the expected interface for the method invocation to succeed. I'm not arguing for mandatory enforcement of that "should" in Python itself, but rather for a clear language so that the provider of a value and the user of a value can communicate about what's expected and/or required by the logic of the program. Bill _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
