[Python-Dev] defaultdict proposal round three
Greg Ewing
greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz
Tue Feb 21 10:50:17 CET 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Feb 21 10:50:17 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] defaultdict proposal round three
- Next message: [Python-Dev] defaultdict proposal round three
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Delaney, Timothy (Tim) wrote: > However, *because* Python uses duck typing, I tend to feel that > subclasses in Python *should* be drop-in replacements. Duck-typing means that the only reliable way to assess whether two types are sufficiently compatible for some purpose is to consult the documentation -- you can't just look at the base class list. I think this should work both ways. It should be okay to *not* document autodict as being a subclass of dict, even if it happens to be implemented that way. I've adopted a convention like this in PyGUI, where I document the classes in terms of a conceptual interface hierarchy, without promising that they will be implemented that way. Greg
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] defaultdict proposal round three
- Next message: [Python-Dev] defaultdict proposal round three
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list