In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MonkeeSage a écrit : > > On Dec 8, 2:51 pm, Glenn Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On Dec 8, 7:44 pm, MonkeeSage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I think it muddies the water to say that a.a() and a.a are the same > >>>thing--obviously they are not. > >> > >>A thing is not what it is; > >>A thing is what it does. > >>This is the Way of the Duck. > >> > >> -- Basho (in his "3 extra syllables" phase) > > > > > > Bah. Type-by-behavior never impressed me much. And I still think that > > a.a is semantically different from a.a() in python. > > It is indeed and very obviously semantically different, and no one said > it wasn't. The first is an attribute lookup, the second is an attribute > lookup followed by a call. Now this doesn't make the attribute lookup > part different in both cases... There are a very few corner cases were you can leave the ()'s out. For example, you can do; raise Exception or raise Exception() but stuff like that is very much a wart in the language syntax.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
