[Python-3000] Discussions with no PEPs (original) (raw)

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Tue Mar 13 04:36:03 CET 2007

At 08:48 PM 3/12/2007 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:

On 3/12/07, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote: > For maybe 80-90% of the purposes that I originally created PyProtocols for, > I have found that "simplegeneric" ( > http://cheeseshop.python.org/simplegeneric/ ) is more than adequate -- and > it's only 80 lines of code.

I believe the correct URL is: http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi/simplegeneric/

Oops.

> Of course, generic functions require you to say 'foo(bar)' instead of > 'bar.foo()' (and IIUC, that's the big sticking point for Guido wrt to GF's > in Py3K).

Yeah, I'd be happy to see things like len() and iter() become generic functions like these (they're already most of the way there) but I'm not sure I'm ready to start writing dict.update(d, ...) instead of d.update(...).

If you know you're using a dict, then of course d.update() is preferable. But wouldn't it be nice if you could call dict.update(d, ...) on anything that had a setitem? :)

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list