On Dec 6, 7:34 am, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au> wrote: > On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:15:27 -0800, Russ P. wrote: > > On Dec 6, 4:32 am, Andreas Waldenburger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 04:02:54 -0800 (PST) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> > class C: > >> > def $method(arg): > >> > $value = arg > > >> > (Note there's no point after $, it's not currently possible). > > If -- and that's a HUGE if -- the compiler is changed to allow $method, > it could certainly be changed to allow $.method. > > >> > Ruby > >> > uses @ and @@ for similar purposes. I agree that the code looks > >> > worse, but also shorter to read and write, so in lines of code that > >> > use many instance attributes, that short $ syntax helps keep the line > >> > shorter. So I may grow to accept this sugar... > > If a line of code uses too many instance attributes to fit comfortably on > a line, spread it over two lines. There is no newline shortage, they are > a renewable resource. > > >> But that is not the way Python is meant to work. There are several > >> tennets in the Zen of Python that don't chime well with this approach. > >> "self" is a speaking identifier, "$" isn't. > > > Is "@" a "speaking identifier? How about "#" and "!="? Last I heard, > > they were all part of Python. > > Yes they are. > > @f > > is pronounced "at f" or "decorate f". > > # comment > > is pronounced "hash comment" or even not pronounced at all. > > x != y > > is pronounced "x not equal to y" > > The proposed > > def $method(arg): > > would be pronounced "def dollar method arg" or "def method self arg". The > first is ugly to my ears, the second confusing.
Regarding "$" as a stand-in for "self" is less of a stretch than the examples you gave. > -2 on this proposal. Did you get two votes in the Presidential election too? 8^) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
