[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
I'm writing Python as if it were strongly typed, never recycling a
name to hold a type other than the original type.
Is this good software engineering practice, or am I missing something
Pythonic?
Others pointed out the wrong wording.
As often, this is not a question to be answered with a simple yes or no.
Duck-typing is very ptyhonic, and as such it is very common to write e.g.
if content_as_string:
inf = StringIO.String(content_as_string)
else:
inf = open(filename)
inf has two totally different types now, depending on the path taken.
And I personally tend to actually do things like this:
if isinstance(foo, str):
foo = unicode(str)
Or such.
But that is more a matter of taste - I personally don't like to many
names lying around, but YMMV.
Diez
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
