On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> (Arguing for auto_args to be in the stdlib may be a better option than
> arguing for new syntax, BTW...)
>
Having such a decorator in the stdlib would allow IDEs and syntax
highlighters to know what's going on.
--
Juancarlo *Añez*
_
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Erik wrote:
> On 25/04/17 23:05, Paul Moore wrote:
>>
>> 1. Writing out the assignments "longhand" is an unacceptable burden.
>
>
> There are reasons why augmented assignment was implemented. One of them was
> to make the code easier to read:
>
> foil = foil + 1
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> FWIW I always liked
> Dart's/Ruby's/Crystal's/(Coffee|Moon)Script's/WhateverElse's style:
>
>
> class Cls {
> Cls(this.a); // IT'S MAGIC
> }
>
>
> but the Python equivalent is admittedly weirder:
>
>
> def ___init__(self, self.attr):
In
FWIW I always liked
Dart's/Ruby's/Crystal's/(Coffee|Moon)Script's/WhateverElse's style:
class Cls {
Cls(this.a); // IT'S MAGIC
}
but the Python equivalent is admittedly weirder:
def ___init__(self, self.attr):
partly because, it'd have to work on pretty much any other variable name,
yet
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Erik wrote:
> On 25/04/17 22:15, Brice PARENT wrote:
>
>> it may be easier to get something like this
>> (I think, as there is no new operator involved) :
>>
>
> No new operator, but still a syntax change, so that doesn't help from that
> POV.
>
>
>> def __init__(
On 25/04/17 22:15, Brice PARENT wrote:
it may be easier to get something like this
(I think, as there is no new operator involved) :
No new operator, but still a syntax change, so that doesn't help from
that POV.
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
self.* = *args
self.** = **k
On 25/04/17 23:05, Paul Moore wrote:
1. Writing out the assignments "longhand" is an unacceptable burden.
There are reasons why augmented assignment was implemented. One of them
was to make the code easier to read:
foil = foil + 1
foil = foi1 + 1
foil += 1
Should one be silly enough t
On 25/04/17 02:15, Chris Angelico wrote:
Bikeshedding: Your example looks a lot more like tuple assignment than
multiple assignment.
Well, originally, I thought it was just the spelling-the-same-name-twice
thing that irritated me and I was just going to suggest a single
assignment version lik
On 25 April 2017 at 22:27, Mike Miller wrote:
> On 2017-04-25 14:15, Brice PARENT wrote:
>>
>> But, any of these proposals, mine and yours, if you really need this to
>> shorten
>> the code writing time or vertical space only, is not a better idea than to
>> propose a macro to your IDE editor, or
On 25 April 2017 at 22:15, Brice PARENT wrote:
>> Also, I did find the decorator proposal intriguing, though have to say I
>> probably wouldn't bother to use it unless it were a builtin or I had a dozen
>> parameters to deal with.
>>
> If you *need* a shorter solution, even though I'm not entirely
On 2017-04-25 14:15, Brice PARENT wrote:
But, any of these proposals, mine and yours, if you really need this to shorten
the code writing time or vertical space only, is not a better idea than to
propose a macro to your IDE editor, or a pull request if it's open source. Such
a macro would gener
On 25.04.2017 20:16, Mike Miller wrote:
Also, I did find the decorator proposal intriguing, though have to say
I probably wouldn't bother to use it unless it were a builtin or I had
a dozen parameters to deal with.
Same here. And practical experience tells me that the usage of this
decorator
Agreed with Steven, although I do find myself a little more annoyed and bothered
by a typical init than him I guess.
Even so I didn't think the current proposals went far enough. To tilt the
balance farther, to make it easier, let's go all the way! Instead of continuing
duplication:
>>> d
Now that I am with a real keyboard and screen and have tried to understand
the OP, I can actually write up my thoughts on the matter.
There are two aspects to the behavior. Giving preference to the class of
the right operand if it is a subclass of the left operand's class is
reasonable and explain
You might want to check out attrs (http://attrs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/).
It can generate the __init__ for you, and much much more.
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 14:33:49 +0200
> From: George Fischhof
> To: Paul Moore
> Cc: Python-Ideas , "Steven D'Aprano"
>
> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Au
2017. ápr. 25. de. 10:04 ezt írta ("Paul Moore" ):
On 25 April 2017 at 03:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 02:08:05AM +0100, Erik wrote:
>
>> I often find myself writing __init__ methods of the form:
>>
>> def __init__(self, foo, bar, baz, spam, ham):
>> self.foo = foo
>>
I actually saw a decorator like that last week,
https://twitter.com/judy2k/status/854330478068977664
On 25 April 2017 at 08:56, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 25 April 2017 at 03:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 02:08:05AM +0100, Erik wrote:
> >
> >> I often find myself writing __
On 25 April 2017 at 03:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 02:08:05AM +0100, Erik wrote:
>
>> I often find myself writing __init__ methods of the form:
>>
>> def __init__(self, foo, bar, baz, spam, ham):
>> self.foo = foo
>> self.bar = bar
>> self.baz = baz
>> self.spam =
18 matches
Mail list logo
