On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 02:49:02PM +0000, kj wrote regarding Classes as
namespaces?:
>
> What's the word on using "classes as namespaces"? E.g.
>
> class _cfg(object):
> spam = 1
> jambon = 3
> huevos = 2
>
> breakfast = (_cfg.spam, _cfg.jambon, _cfg.huevos)
>
>
> Granted, this is not the "intended use" for classes, and therefore
> could be viewed as a misuse ("that's what dictionaries are for",
> etc.). But other than this somewhat academic objection[*], I really
> can see no problem with using classes in this way.
>
> And yet, I've come across online murky warnings against using
> classes as "pseudo-namespaces". Is there some problem that I'm
> not seeing with this technique?
>
> ~K
I don't see anything wrong with this, except that I would clean it up in a
couple ways. Like other posters, I would give the class a proper class name
(Cfg).
I also would not assign integers to spam, jambon, or huevos. Instead I would
assign each a bare object(). That way you won't get unexpected interactions
with other constants outside the class. An object() is equal only to itself.
I would also not rule out letting your "pseudo-namespace" grow into a
full-fledged class. If you've got a method that makes sense with your class,
use it.
class Cfg(object):
spam = object()
jambon = object()
huevos = object()
def get_animal(self, meat):
if meat == self.jambon:
return 'pig'
elif meat == self.huevos:
return 'chicken'
elif meat = self.spam:
return 'spamalope'
Later, perhaps, you might refactor so that each meat type (OK so huevos aren't
a meat) gets its own subclass, with a simple, one-line get_animal method.
Cheers,
Cliff
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
