[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name (original) (raw)
Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Thu Jan 13 02🔞48 CET 2005
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 05:54 PM 1/12/05 -0700, Steven Bethard wrote:
Not that my opinion counts for much =), but returning None does seem much simpler to me. I also haven't seen any arguments against this route of handling protocol nonconformance... Is there a particular advantage to the exception-raising scheme?
Only if there's any objection to giving the 'object' type a default conform method that returns 'self' if 'isinstance(protocol,ClassTypes) and isinstance(self,protocol)'.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]