[Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3 (original) (raw)

R. David Murray rdmurray at bitdance.com
Thu May 10 01:44:01 CEST 2012

On Thu, 10 May 2012 08:14:55 +1000, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

Given that the statement form is referred to as a "class definition", and this is the dynamic equivalent, I'm inclined to go with "type.define()". Dynamic type definition is more consistent with existing terminology than dynamic type creation.

Yeah, but that's the statement form. I think of the characters in the .py file as the definition. If I'm creating a class dynamically...I'm creating(*) it, not defining it.

I don't think it's a big deal, though. Either word will work.

--David

(*) Actually, come to think of it, I probably refer to it as "constructing" the class, rather than creating or defining it. It's the type equivalent of constructing an instance, perhaps?

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list