On Jul 28, 4:59 am, "Russ P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 27, 3:11 am, alex23 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jul 27, 4:26 pm, "Russ P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jul 26, 11:18 pm, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The use of <nothing>'.' has been suggested before and rejected. > > > > Where and why? > > > Google is your > > friend:http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-April/000793.html > > What Guido rejected there is most certainly *not* > what I suggested. I agree with Guido on that one.
Orly? Ian Bicking wrote: "I propose that the self argument be removed from method definitions." Philip Eby suggested: > def .aMethod(arg1, arg2): > return .otherMethod(arg1*2+arg2) Guido shot them all down by stating: > [Y]ou're proposing to hide a > fundamental truth in Python, that methods are "just" functions whose > first argument can be supplied using syntactic sugar Any more reading comprehension we can do for you? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
