Alex Martelli writes: > You make a good point. I do like being able to say foo.bar=baz rather > than foo['bar']=baz in certain cases -- not so much to save 3 chars, but > to avoid excessive punctuation; however, I don't really need this AND > all of dict's power at the same time, so, I don't inherit from dict:-).
Yes. Attribute syntax looks nicer, in particular one implements a sort of private "variables collected in a dict" thing (e.g. SQL field names) but still wants some dict functionality. Another variant I thought of would be to prefix dict methods with '_' (except those that already start with '__') and (if implemented as a dict subtype) also override the original names with a "sorry, use _<foo>" error method. (Posting a bit sporatically currently, disappearing for a week again now.) -- Hallvard -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
