WANG Cong wrote:
On 06/27/10 12:01, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 25, 8:24 pm, WANG Cong <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Understand, but please consider my proposal again, if we switched to:
setattr(foo, 'new_attr', "blah")
by default, isn't Python still dynamic as it is? (Please teach me if I
am wrong here.)
This why I said the questionable thing is not so much related with dynamic
programming or not.
Because it makes dynamicism harder to do.
Like I said, Python's goal isn't simply to make dynamicism possible,
it's to make it easy.
"foo.new_attr = 'blah'" is easier than using setattr.
I do agree it's easier, but why do we need this to be easy? This is
really my question.
To excerpt from
http://www1.american.edu/cas/econ/faculty/isaac/choose_python.pdf
<quote>
Choose the simple over the complex, and the complex over the complicated.
</quote>
Also, since it is easier, why not drop the harder one, setattr()?
Because setattr and friends are needed when the variable names are
constructed dynamically.
~Ethan~
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
