On 9/9/05, holger krekel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It matters because metaclass = type is completely obscure. How would
any non-expert have a clue what it means?
How would this non-expert have a clue what
from __future__ import new_style_classes means?
That is the point!!! If I am a
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Tristan Seligmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Lisandro Dalcin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-09-08 13:56:07 -0300]:
Yes, you are right. But this way, you are making explicit a behavior
that will be implicit in the future.
For example, we could also do:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:31 -0700, Russell E. Owen wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Tristan Seligmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why does it matter if the single statement you insert is spelled
metaclass = type instead of from future import whatever?
Remember, unlike the
Lisandro Dalcín proposes:
Any possibility to add something like
from __future__ import new_style_classes
Tristan Seligmann writes:
Why does it matter if the single statement you insert is spelled
metaclass = type instead of from future import whatever?
Russell Owen responds:
It
Can you all just stop discussing this? In the last 4 contributions
nothing has been added that hasn't been said yet. It's not going to
change. Get used to it.There are more important issues.
On 9/9/05, Russell E. Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PEP 3000 - Core language says
(http://www.python.org/peps/pep-3000.html#core-language) :
- Support only new-style classes; classic classes will be gone
Any possibility to add something like
from __future__ import new_style_classes
to have newly defined classes implicitly derive from 'object'
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
Any possibility to add something like
from __future__ import new_style_classes
to have newly defined classes implicitly derive from 'object' (I
understand this will be the implicit behavior when classic classes go
away in Py3.0).
You can
On 9/8/05, Aahz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can already do
__metaclass__ = type
within each module
Yes, you are right. But this way, you are making explicit a behavior
that will be implicit in the future.
For example, we could also do:
two = float(4)/float(2)
instead of
* Lisandro Dalcin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-09-08 13:56:07 -0300]:
Yes, you are right. But this way, you are making explicit a behavior
that will be implicit in the future.
For example, we could also do:
two = float(4)/float(2)
instead of
from __future__ import division
