I see no problem in repeating the methods, or inheriting the implementation. However, if namespace and bunch are actually different concepts (one with reference semantics, the other with copy), then __repr__ at least would need to be specialized, to highlight the difference.
Yeah, I could certainly see them being separate... Of course, someone else will have to write the PEP for Namespace then. ;)
def __ge__(self, other): for attrname in other.__dict__.keys(): if not attrname in self.__dict__: return False return True
I realize that interfaces may be addressed formally by a current PEP, but, even if they are, this "cheap and cheerful" approach appeals to me for duck-typing.
However, as I think more about this, I realize that I am stretching your concept past its breaking point, and that whatever the merits of this approach, it's not helping you with bunch. Thanks for knocking the ideas around with me.
My pleasure. It's good to talk some use-cases, and make sure I cover as much as is feasible in the PEP. I think __ge__ is probably too far out from the original intentions, but I'll make sure to write Bunch/Namespace to be as inheritance-friendly as possible so that adding such behavior by inheriting from Bunch/Namespace should be simple.
Thanks for all your comments!
Steve -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
