Ethan Furman wrote:
I suppose the other option is to have `.value` be whatever was assigned (1, 'really big country', and (8273.199, 517) ),

I thought that was the intention all along, and that we'd
given up on the idea of auto-assigning integer values
(because it would require either new syntax or extremely
dark magic).

Yes, Guido rejected the auto-numbering syntax a while back. The only case in which auto-numbering occurs (per PEP 435) is the "convenience syntax":

">

(original) (raw)

On 1 May 2013 02:27, Eli Bendersky <eliben@gmail.com> wrote:



On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
Ethan Furman wrote:
I suppose the other option is to have \`.value\` be whatever was assigned (1, 'really big country', and (8273.199, 517) ),

I thought that was the intention all along, and that we'd
given up on the idea of auto-assigning integer values
(because it would require either new syntax or extremely
dark magic).

Yes, Guido rejected the auto-numbering syntax a while back. The only case in which auto-numbering occurs (per PEP 435) is the "convenience syntax":

Animal = Enum('Animal', 'fox dog cat')


Actually, since Guido has pronounced that definition order will be the default, there's no reason each Enum instance couldn't have an "ordinal" attribute.


Tim Delaney