On Dec 5, 8:21 pm, "Daniel Fetchinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi folks, > > The story of the explicit self in method definitions has been > discussed to death and we all know it will stay. However, Guido > himself acknowledged that an alternative syntax makes perfect sense > and having both (old and new) in a future version of python is a > possibility since it maintains backward compatibility. The alternative > syntax will be syntactic sugar for the old one. This blog post of his > is what I'm talking about: > > http://neopythonic.blogspot.com/2008/10/why-explicit-self-has-to-stay... > > The proposal is to allow this: > > class C: > def self.method( arg ): > self.value = arg > return self.value > > instead of this: > > class C: > def method( self, arg ): > self.value = arg > return self.value > > I.e. explicit self stays only the syntax is slightly different and may > seem attractive to some. ...
Would it be valid outside class definitions too? (As follows...) def sequence.shuffle( ): x= sequence[ 0 ] sequence[ 0 ]= sequence[ -1 ] ...etc. shuffle( listA ) Can you still call it by class membership? (As follows...) C.method( inst, arg ) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
