On 2019-10-21 10:44, gedizgu...@gmail.com wrote:
m and n are lists or dicts or enumerates or classes or anything it can be
assigned like following:
instead of :
m.a=n.a;
m.b=n.b;
m.c=n.c;
...
I suggest:
a,b,c of m to n ;
Interesting. I also saw this type of redundancy in my code. Instead of
making a function, like `copy_attrs()` I changed my APIs to accept
over-specified attributes. Instead, I would write
m = n
... or simply use `n` where `m` was expected. Yes, `n` would have more
attributes than needed, but that is solved by ensuring the receiver can
gracefully reject the extra attributes; I decorate pedantic functions
that complain about extra parameters.
In your other example, I would write:
adiv=document.createElement("div")
adiv.style = comp
There is the problem of unfortunate namespace overlap; where the
destination expects some attribute X and the source has an attribute of
the same name, X, but the value is wrong. But this is not a large
problem: You can plan your attribute names on a program-wide scale so
that the same attribute name means the same thing across your whole
program, and different attribute names mean different things across your
whole program. This does not require too much forward planning, rather
more refactoring as you rename parameters to match, or differ, as
needed. This is what the ES6 structuring/destructuring is promoting.
Consider a function that uses `adiv`:
drawBox = (adiv) => {
const {x, y, height, width} = adiv.style;
}
the extra attributes of `comp` are ignored; specific attribute copying
is not required.
_______________________________________________
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/FY24FAGNQAGTA5CRZCI2WWEGF5RQPPPD/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
