On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Jan Kaliszewski<z...@chopin.edu.pl> wrote: > 04-09-2009 Ken Newton <krnew...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I like this version very much. I'm ready to put this into practice to see >> how it works in practice. > > [snip] > > Not only you (Ken) and me. :-) It appears that the idea is quite old. Nick > Coghlan replied at python-id...@python.org: > >> Jan Kaliszewski wrote: >>> >>> What do you think about it? >> >> It reminds me a bit of the old (short-lived) namespaces module: >> >> >> http://web.archive.org/web/20060216094030/http://namespace.python-hosting.com/ >> >> Steven's draft PEP on the topic is still available in the python-list >> archives: >> >> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2005-February/307235.html >> >> The problem we found with it was that the basic solutions (empty class >> and now named_tuple) were good enough that it wasn't worth the hassle >> involved in grabbing an extra library for it. > > Named tuples (which indeed are really very nice) are read-only, but the > approach they represent could (and IMHO should) be extended to some kind > of mutable objects.
Maybe something like http://code.activestate.com/recipes/576555/ ? George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
