On Jul 27, 2:56 am, Nikolaus Rath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> What he wants is to write > > > > class foo: > >> def bar(arg): > >> self.whatever = arg + 1 > > >> instead of > > >> class foo: > >> def bar(self, arg) > >> self.whatever = arg + 1 > > >> so 'self' should *automatically* only be inserted in the function > >> declaration, and *manually* be typed for attributes. > > > which means making 'self' a keyword just so it can be omitted. Silly > > and pernicious. > > Well, I guess that's more a matter of personal preference. I would go > for it immediately (and also try rename it to '@' at the same time). > > Best, > > -Nikolaus > > --
> »It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority. > By definition, there are already enough people to do that.« > -J.H. Hardy Hardy has an interesting claim. OT. He has omitted a couple of lemmas, which aren't true. 1: There are enough people to be in the majority. 2: It is not worthwhile to be in the majority. 3: There is no majority of worthwhile timespending. 4: There is no majority of intelligent men. 5: Being in the majority takes time. It is worth some intelligent men's time to be in the majority; the majority of intelligent men are intelligent men, and are in the majority of intelligent men. Perhaps it is merely not worth their time to be. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
