On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Petr Viktorin <encu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/17/2017 10:31 PM, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: > >> I completely agree. I love namedtuples but I've never been too happy >> about the additional overhead vs. plain tuples (both for creation and >> attribute access times), to the point that I explicitly avoid to use them >> in certain circumstances (e.g. a busy loop) and only for public end-user >> APIs returning multiple values. >> >> To be entirely honest, I'm not even sure why they need to be forcefully >> declared upfront in the first place, instead of just having a first-class >> function (builtin?) written in C: >> >> >>> ntuple(x=1, y=0) >> (x=1, y=0) >> >> ...or even a literal as in: >> >> >>> (x=1, y=0) >> (x=1, y=0) >> >> Most of the times this is what I really want: quickly returning an >> anonymous tuple with named attributes and nothing else, similarly to >> os.times() & others. [...] >> > > It seems that you want `types.SimpleNamespace(x=1, y=0)`. > That doesn't support indexing (obj[0]). -- Giampaolo - http://grodola.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
