[Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time (original) (raw)
Bill Janssen janssen at parc.com
Wed Apr 25 01:30:37 CEST 2007
- Previous message: [Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time
- Next message: [Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Just to chime in...
My preference would be to have "abstract" just mark classes that define an API, that define the "abstraction" of that particular interface. Not carry over meanings from Java and C++ that "abstract" somehow always means "partial" or "incomplete". I'd envision having "abstract" classes that are in fact also useful and complete implementations. "Abstract" methods don't really make sense (to me) in Python. This sounds very close to what Guido has already.
Maybe "abstraction" is a better keyword than "abstract".
Maybe it makes sense to have "abstraction" classes, and an "@ignorethismethod" decorator to mark methods that are not part of the abstraction, instead of "@abstractmethod" decorators to mark the methods that are part of the abstraction.
Bill
- Previous message: [Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time
- Next message: [Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]