Whatever you all propose, coming from a java and c++ background, OOP in python is quite cumbersome.
if you tell that i am not a python guy, then consider that current oop style does not reflect python's style of ease and simplicity is __init__ really a good syntax choice? Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer, Mauritius https://abdurrahmaanjanhangeer.wordpress.com On 14 May 2017 11:05, "Steven D'Aprano" <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 04:07:44AM +0000, Simon Ramstedt wrote: > > Hi, do you have an opinion on the following? > > Hi, and welcome, and of course we have an opinion! This is Python-Ideas, > we're very opinionated :-) > > > Wouldn't it be nice to define classes via a simple constructor function > (as > > below) instead of a conventional class definition? > > No. > > > *conventional*: > > > > class MyClass(ParentClass): > > def __init__(x): > > self._x = x > > def my_method(y): > > z = self._x + y > > return z > > Looks good to me. It is nicely explicit that you're creating a class, > the superclass or superclasses are easy to see, and the attributes are > explicit. > > > > *proposed*: > > > > def MyClass(x): > > That is the exact same syntax for defining a function called "MyClass", > that takes one argument, x. How is Python (and the reader!) supposed to > tell which calls to def return a class and which return a function? > > > > self = ParentClass() > > What if you have multiple parent classes? > > Why is self an instance of the parent class, instead of MyClass? > > > > def my_method(y): > > z = x + y > > return z > > The local variable x is not defined. Wait, is that supposed to come from > the closure def MyClass(x)? > > What if your class has twenty methods, each of which takes different > arguments? Do you have to write: > > def MyClass(x, # used in my_method > y, # used in another_method > z, # used in third_method, > a, b, c, # used in fourth_method > ... # blah blah blah > ): > > How does this generalise to non-toy classes, classes with more than one > method? > > > > self.my_method = my_method # that's cumbersome (see comments > below) > > return self > > > > > > Here are the pros and cons I could come up with for the proposed method: > > > > (+) Simpler and more explicit. > > I think you mean "More complicated and less explicit". > > Is this supposed to be some sort of prototype-based OOP instead of > class-based OOP? I'd be interested in investigating prototype-based > objects, but I don't think this is the way to do it. > > > > -- > Steve > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > Python-ideas@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
