Re: Dunder docs again (was Pythonic style)
On 2016-04-28 13:25, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: MRAB : 'pythonic-ness'? Surely it's 'pythonicity'! :-) Doubt it: Full Definition of generic [...] —generically \-i-k(ə-)lē\ adverb —genericness noun http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/generic> I can point you to 3 alternatives, from oldest to newest: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/genericalness http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/genericness http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/genericity -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Dunder docs again (was Pythonic style)
MRAB : > 'pythonic-ness'? Surely it's 'pythonicity'! :-) Doubt it: Full Definition of generic [...] —generically \-i-k(ə-)lē\ adverb —genericness noun http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/generic> Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Dunder docs again (was Pythonic style)
On 2016-04-28 12:45, Rustom Mody wrote: On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 4:46:43 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote: On 2016-04-28 06:16, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:26:21 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: >> My rule of thumb is: Dunders are for defining, not for calling. It's >> not a hard-and-fast rule, but it'll get you through 99%+ of >> situations. > > Neat and clever. > Should get in the docs somewhere > Is it worthy of being in the Zen of Python? :-) Thats more than I intended... But heck why not?! I find that dunder methods are poorly documented, especially when compared to their 'pythonic-ness'. Ive spoken of this on and off, eg https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2015-May/691329.html 'pythonic-ness'? Surely it's 'pythonicity'! :-) -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
