mastahyeti added the comment: Senthil, Can you give an example of how namedtuple would be more convenient? It is definitely more convenient than an ordinary tuple, but its inconvenient having its items not be assignable. As I showed in my example above, it is usable as-is, but it is clunky. As David says above, this obviously needs to be moved to another list for discussion of whether the current behavior is desirable.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Senthil Kumaran <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Senthil Kumaran added the comment: > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:17 AM, mastahyeti <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: >> >> When parsing a url with urlparse.urlparse, the return type is non-mutable >> (named tuple). This is really inconvenient, because one of the most common >> (imop) use cases for urlparse is to parse a url, make an adjustment or >> change and then unparse it. Currently, something like this is required: > > Not actually, using the namedtuple is a convenience and working > through way may help you to be generate your target url in a more > meaningful way. Also remember that we moved to namedtuple after > understanding that it is more meaningful to use that for parsed > result. So, my vote for this proposal is -1. And if you need discuss > the strategies of how to use it, then you can ask over at python-help > or related lists. > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue15824> > _______________________________________ ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15824> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
