Steven Bethard wrote:
> On 4/17/06, Russell E. Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> At some point folks were discussing use cases of "make" where it was
>> important to preserve the order in which items were added to the
>> namespace.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest adding an implementation of an ordered d
On 4/17/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
> > This PEP proposes a generalization of the class-declaration syntax,
> > the ``make`` statement. The proposed syntax and semantics parallel
> > the syntax for class definition, and so::
> >
> >make :
> >
>
On 4/17/06, Russell E. Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At some point folks were discussing use cases of "make" where it was
> important to preserve the order in which items were added to the
> namespace.
>
> I'd like to suggest adding an implementation of an ordered dictionary to
> standard pytho
At some point folks were discussing use cases of "make" where it was
important to preserve the order in which items were added to the
namespace.
I'd like to suggest adding an implementation of an ordered dictionary to
standard python (e.g. as a library or built in type). It's inherently
useful
Steven Bethard wrote:
> This PEP proposes a generalization of the class-declaration syntax,
> the ``make`` statement. The proposed syntax and semantics parallel
> the syntax for class definition, and so::
>
>make :
>
I can't really see any use case for . In particular, you could
On 4/15/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
>
> >make :
> >
>
> I don't like the position of the name being defined.
> It should be straight after the opening keyword, as
> with 'def' and 'class'.
I see where you're coming from, but the current ordering
Greg Ewing wrote:
> I don't like the position of the name being defined.
> It should be straight after the opening keyword, as
> with 'def' and 'class'. This makes it much easier
> to search for definitions of things, both by eyeball
> and editor search functions, etc.
>
>
Also, all other defini
Steven Bethard wrote:
>make :
>
I don't like the position of the name being defined.
It should be straight after the opening keyword, as
with 'def' and 'class'. This makes it much easier
to search for definitions of things, both by eyeball
and editor search functions, etc.
--
Greg
BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
> [nice way to declare properties with "make"]
>
>
>>Of course, properties are only one of the many possible uses of the
>>make statement. The make statement is useful in essentially any
>>situation where a name is associated with a namespace. So, for
>
>
> So far, in t
[nice way to declare properties with "make"]
> Of course, properties are only one of the many possible uses of the
> make statement. The make statement is useful in essentially any
> situation where a name is associated with a namespace. So, for
So far, in this thread that is the only useful us
Travis> I generally like the idea. A different name would be better.
Travis> Here's a list of approximate synonyms that might work (ordered
Travis> by my preference...)
... lots of suggestions elided ...
None of the alternatives seem better to me than "make" or "create". In
fa
On 4/13/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:21 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
[snip examples using class/__metaclass__ statements to create non-types]
> >The question is, is the intent still clear?
>
> Depends on your use case. I'm just saying that the PEP would be ton
Steven Bethard wrote:
> On 4/13/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Steven Bethard wrote:
>>
>>>I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
>>>to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
>>>version is Python 2.6. You can also see th
At 02:21 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
>On 4/13/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 01:51 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> > >Sorry, I'm not clear on exactly what you're suggesting. Are you
> > >suggesting I try to implement the make-statement using context
On 4/13/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 01:51 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> >Sorry, I'm not clear on exactly what you're suggesting. Are you
> >suggesting I try to implement the make-statement using context
> >managers? Or that I use a context manager to address M
At 01:51 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
>Sorry, I'm not clear on exactly what you're suggesting. Are you
>suggesting I try to implement the make-statement using context
>managers? Or that I use a context manager to address Martin's
>problem?
Yes. :) Both. Or neither. What I'm sugg
On 4/13/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:05 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> >On 4/13/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Steven Bethard wrote:
> > > > I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> > > > to go ahead and p
On 4/13/06, Ian D. Bollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess I fail to see how this syntax is a significant improvement over
> metaclasses (though __metaclass__ = xyz may not be the most aesthetic
> construct.)
It doesn't seem strange to you to have to use a *class* statement and
a __meta*cla
I guess I fail to see how this syntax is a significant improvement over
metaclasses (though __metaclass__ = xyz may not be the most aesthetic
construct.)
-- Ian D. Bollinger
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailm
At 12:05 PM 4/13/2006 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
>On 4/13/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Steven Bethard wrote:
> > > I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> > > to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
> > > version is
On 4/13/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
> > I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> > to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
> > version is Python 2.6. You can also see the PEP at:
> > http://ww
On 4/13/06, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
> > I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> > to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
> > version is Python 2.6. You can also see the PEP at:
> > http://www.
Steven Bethard wrote:
> I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
> version is Python 2.6. You can also see the PEP at:
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0359/
>
> Thanks in advance for the feed
Steven Bethard wrote:
> I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
> to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
> version is Python 2.6. You can also see the PEP at:
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0359/
>
> Thanks in advance for the feed
I know 2.5's not out yet, but since I now have a PEP number, I'm going
to go ahead and post this for discussion. Currently, the target
version is Python 2.6. You can also see the PEP at:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0359/
Thanks in advance for the feedback!
PEP: 359
Title: The "make"
25 matches
Mail list logo
