On Oct 30, 1:30 am, George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Having a builtin len() that calls the method __len__ > seems (using your words) "not only foolish but wasteful".
But what about (for instance) having the bitwise not operator (^) calling __bitwise_not__. Is that foolish and wasteful? Would a hypothetical special syntax for len be foolish and wasteful. All I'm trying to say here is that len is a built-in for a reason: because Python considers len to be an operator. It's not inconsistent design. It's not a defective spelling for a method. len was deliberately given a status greater than method calls. Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
