Paulo J. Matos a écrit : (snip)
However, I wouldn't dare to say Python needs structures to be a good language, or anything similar. My question was more directed to : if there aren't structures in Python, what do Pythonists use instead? (I have seen dicts might be an alternative,
Yes, and the most obvious one - at least when all you need is a kind of data transfert object. Else, well, C++ structs are just a survival of a C feature kept for compatibility reasons - technically speaking, you just don't need structs when you have classes.
but as I said in previous post, they seem to flexible [making them a canon to shoot a fly,
Err... I'm afraid you'll find Python way to flexible and dangerous, then. You may not be aware of the fact that you can add / remove / replace objects attributes (and methods) at runtime ? FWIW, and a couple corner cases set asides, Python objects are mostly glorified dicts.
and they probably lack constant-time access, right?]
AFAIK, it's almost constant-time access. But you won't get anything better using classes, since attributes are stored in a dict anyway.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
