[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as (original) (raw)
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Mon Feb 25 16:22:34 CET 2013
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Skip Montanaro <skip at pobox.com> wrote:
If it was just once or twice, sure, but I use them as names for ints, which means I use them as ints, which means I would have a boat load of int() calls.
Personally I don't see "name for ints" as being the main use case for enums. Ethan seems to have a use case, even if it is using enums to masquerade as true named constants. Perhaps the correct solution is to consider support for true constants in Python. (I would be surprised if there wasn't already at least one rejected or dormant PEP regarding that topic.)
I don't think we need true constants - labelled values should suffice for easier to debug magic numbers.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]