On 15/03/2011 07:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Eric Smith<e...@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
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
