Steven Bethard wrote: > I've updated the PEP based on a number of comments on comp.lang.python. > The most updated versions are still at: > > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~bethard/py/pep_create_statement.txt > http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~bethard/py/pep_create_statement.html > > In this post, I'm especially soliciting review of Carl Banks's point > (now discussed under Open Issues) which asks if it would be better to > have the create statement translated into: > > <name> = <callable>("<name>", *<tuple>, **<namespace>) > > instead of the current: > > <name> = <callable>("<name>", <tuple>, <namespace>) > > The former allows the create statement to be applied to a wider variety > of callables; the latter keeps a better parallel with the class statement.
Meh. I don't think the args, kwargs is a good idea at all, and wasn't suggesting that. For this construction not to apply to type objects would be a mistake. I wanted us to consider whether it was a problem for it not to work in certain useful cases (such as dicts), and whether it was deal-breaking, and what to do about it if not. Off the top of my head, a simple way to make this work for both types and dicts is to have a special static method called __make__ (or __create__) that is called by this syntax. For type objects, __make__ is a synonym for __new__. For dict, it can call __new__ with the third argument. Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list