Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alex Popescu a écrit : > > Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > (snip) > >> if hasattr(obj, '__call__'): > >> # it's a callable > >> > >> but I don't find it so Pythonic to have to check for a __magic__ > >> method. > > > > It looks like Python devs have decided it is Pythonic, because it is > > already in the PEP. > > I do know, and I disagree with this decision. > > FWIW, repr(obj) is mostly syntactic sugar for obj.__repr__(), > getattr(obj, name) for obj.__getattr__(name), type(obj) for > obj.__class__ etc... IOW, we do have a lot of builtin functions that > mostly encapsulate calls to __magic__ methods, and I definitively don't > understand why this specific one (=> callable(obj)) should disappear. I
Maybe because it DOESN'T "encapsulate a call" to a magic method, but rather the mere check for the presence of one? > usually have lot of respect for Guido's talent as a language designer > (obviously since Python is still MFL), but I have to say I find this > particular decision just plain stupid. Sorry. The mere check of whether an object possesses some important special method is best accomplished through the abstract-base-classes machinery (new in Python 3.0: see <http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3119/>). At this time there is no Callable ABC, but you're welcome to argue for it on the python-3000 mailing list (please do check the archives and/or check privately with the PEP owner first to avoid duplication). Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
