On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:11:00 -0700, Austin Bingham
<austin.bing...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Gabriel Genellina
<gagsl-...@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
En Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:42:20 -0300, Austin Bingham
<austin.bing...@gmail.com> escribió:
I think you didn't understand correctly Anthony Tolle's suggestion:
py> class Foo:
... def __init__(self, name): self.name = name
...
py> objs = [Foo('Joe'), Foo('Jim'), Foo('Tom'), Foo('Jim')]
py> objs
I understand Anthony perfectly. Yes, I can construct a dict as you
specify, where all of the keys map to values with name attributes
equal to the key. My point is that dict doesn't really help me enforce
that beyond simply letting me set it up; it doesn't care about the
values at all, just the keys.
Perhaps this is an overly naive solution, but could you not define a class
that implemented the set interface but used a dict for internal storage,
and use that? You'd still have uniqueness (by dict key, which your class
would define as object name) and as a bonus, retrievability by name, which
set wouldn't give you.
--
Rami Chowdhury
"Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity" --
Hanlon's Razor
408-597-7068 (US) / 07875-841-046 (UK) / 0189-245544 (BD)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
