On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 07:19:42PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 6:55 PM Ricky Teachey <ri...@teachey.org> wrote: > [Steven] > > > If the core developers don't consider namedtuples important enough to > >> get syntactic support, I doubt that namespaces will. [...]
> Except it's wrong. The successor of namedtuple is typing.NamedTuple which > supports this syntactically. From the [docs]( > https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.NamedTuple): > ``` > class Employee(NamedTuple): > name: str > id: int > ``` Oh that's nice! I thought that typing.NamedTuple was only for type annotations, I had no idea you could use it for actual named tuples. Should it be aliased in collections if we want people to consider using it instead of namedtuple? I would never go looking in typing for non-annotation-related uses, and I'm probably not the only one. In any case, that's still using existing syntax (class statement), not a dedicated new "NamedTuple" keyword. And if there's no NamedTuple keyword, we shouldn't expect a Namespace keyword either :-) -- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/SXF3RKYQ6DXFKX2RFMUDUKAWQEGXGHP3/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
