05.05.21 17:18, Shreyan Avigyan пише:
> I don't know if it's worth adding private to python modules but what about
> classes? Private in class is an important feature in OOP that Python lacks
> (Most OOP languages have private like Java, C++, etc.). I don't know why it
> was introduced in the fi
On 06May2021 03:43, Dennis Sweeney wrote:
>Maybe I'm missing something, but why do you need the SimpleNamespace at all?
>Why not make your own mapping as in
>
>class StringMapper:
>...
>def __getitem__(self, s):
># Whatever arbitrary behavior you want
>
Maybe I'm missing something, but why do you need the SimpleNamespace at all?
Why not make your own mapping as in
class StringMapper:
...
def __getitem__(self, s):
# Whatever arbitrary behavior you want
# Process suffixes, etc here, for example:
On 25Apr2021 10:54, Cameron Simpson wrote:
>On 24Apr2021 22:35, Stephen J. Turnbull
>wrote:
>[...]
>> > My use case is presupplied strings, eg a command line supplied
>> > format string.
>>
>>In that case the format string is user input, and x is a variable in
>>the program that the user can hav
Hi Shreyan,
You say:
On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 02:18:55PM -, Shreyan Avigyan wrote:
> I don't know if it's worth adding private to python modules but what
> about classes? Private in class is an important feature in OOP that
> Python lacks (Most OOP languages have private like Java, C++, etc
I agree with the comment about removing full justification.
Also, I think the Masonite docs' navigation is far superior to the Python
docs. I like the full contents on the left, along with the version button,
and the local jump on the right. The python docs require you to navigate
somehwere e
On Wed, May 5, 2021, 02:11 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> My comments follow, interleaved with Matt's.
>
>
> On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 11:30:51PM +0100, Matt del Valle wrote:
>
> > But you've pretty much perfectly identified the benefits here, I'll just
> > elaborate on them a bit.
> >
> > - the indentat
See my comment here -
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/L5LUQDNNV5ZTF4E33L2JSOYIKPJUJJK5/
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://m
I don't know if it's worth adding private to python modules but what about
classes? Private in class is an important feature in OOP that Python lacks
(Most OOP languages have private like Java, C++, etc.). I don't know why it was
introduced in the first place but it's kind of a convention to hav
One issue with many common programming languages is that they appear to
offer access protections via private/protected etc, but seldom do so
securely (`private` modifiers are never, to my knowledge, intended to be a
security mechanism).
/
Take for example C++:
#include
#include
clas
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 11:43 PM Shreyan Avigyan
wrote:
>
> Private methods, functions and variables are very common in programming
> languages. But Python doesn't support private. It has conventions for naming
> so considered private but not private. Most of the time private is never
> required
Hey Shreyan,
>From what I understand, Python's design focuses on enabling the developer to
do whatever she feels right. Having a class attribute or something marked
as "private" is more of a warning to people _using_ that class that they
shouldn't tinker with that field. If I'm using a class that
Private methods, functions and variables are very common in programming
languages. But Python doesn't support private. It has conventions for naming so
considered private but not private. Most of the time private is never required,
what Python provides is more than enough. But the need for priva
Thanks Paul, you channelled my thinking exactly correctly.
I am not an expert on C++, but I think that's roughly how C++ namespaces
work. Any C++ coders care to confirm or correct me?
Steve
On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:05:56PM +0100, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 11:33, Matt del Va
Whoops. I totally misread that! My brain unhelpfully supplied string quotes
in the return statement of the `eggs` methods, rather than parsing them as
function calls. ...for some reason I could not explain to you.
Maybe I've grown too dependent on syntax highlighting!
I see what Steven meant now.
On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 11:33, Matt del Valle wrote:
>> To give an example:
>>
>> def spam():
>> return "spam spam spam!"
>>
>> def eggs():
>> return spam()
>>
>> namespace Shop:
>> def spam():
>> return "There's not much call for spam here."
>>
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 8:33 PM Matt del Valle wrote:
> Creating lots of unnecessary classes just for namespacing, as we currently
> have to resort to, isn't ideal.
>
> What you're calling 'an unnecessary level of indirection', quickly becomes a
> big boost to clarity (both in the written code an
>
> So if A is capable of looking up "B.C.D", but it's also capable of
> looking up "B" and following the chain... what happens when you
> reassign something? What does this line of code do?
>
A is capable of looking up B.C.D in one step if you use `getattr` because
the way A forwards on attribute
18 matches
Mail list logo
