[Python-Dev] Py2.6 ideas (original) (raw)

Delaney, Timothy (Tim) tdelaney at avaya.com
Fri Feb 16 00:50:24 CET 2007

skip at pobox.com wrote:

>> Hm, but why would they still have to be tuples? Why not just have a >> generic 'record' class?

Tim> Hmm - possibilities. "record" definitely has greater connotations Tim> of heterogeneous elements than "tuple", which would put paid to the Tim> constant arguments that "a tuple is really just an immutable list". (What do you mean by "... put paid ..."? It doesn't parse for me.) Based on posts the current thread in c.l.py with the improbable subject "f---ing typechecking", lots of people refuse to believe tuples are anything other than immutable lists.

Sorry - "put paid to" means "to finish" ... http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/293200.html

That thread is a perfect example why I think a "record" type should be standard in python, and "tuple" should be deprecated (and removed in 3.0).

Instead, have mutable and immutable lists, and mutable and immutable records. You could add a mutable list and an immutable list (resulting always in a new mutable list I think). You could not add two records together (even if neither had named elements).

Cheers,

Tim Delaney

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list