Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Wildemar Wildenburger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > __init__() /initializes/ an instance (automatically after > > creation). It is called, /after/ the instance has been constructed > > I don't understand the purpose of this "correction". After all, > __init__ *is* the closest equivalent to what other languages would > call a constructor.
No. That would be '__new__', which actually constructs the instance, and actually returns it to the caller. '__init__' does neither of those. It so happens that, in Python, one usually overrrides the initialiser and not the constructor. Thus, the confusion is understandable, but still regrettable and avoidable. -- \ "My, your, his, hers, ours, theirs, its. I'm, you're, he's, | `\ she's, we're, they're, it's." —anonymous, | _o__) alt.sysadmin.recovery | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
