On Nov 8, 8:18 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek- central.gen.new_zealand> wrote: > In message <5dlbo.1024$w8....@twister2.libero.it>, not1xor1 (Alessandro) > wrote: > > > I'm already using plain functions, but thought that wrapping most of > > them in a str subclass would let me save some time and yield cleaner > > and more manageable code > > How exactly does > > a.f(b, c) > > save time over > > f(a, b, c) > > ?
I think if you'll re-read the OP's statements (specifically the ones you quoted!) then you will see it's not an issue of time, its an issue of form and structure. Its an issue of paradigm. The OP wishes to keep his code as true to OOP as possible and what is wrong with that? Nothing in my book! One thing i love about Python is the fact that it can please almost all the "religious paradigm zealots" with it's multiple choice approach to programming. However some of the features that OOP fundamentalists hold dear in their heart are not always achievable in a clean manner with Python. Yes you could use a function but that is not the OOP way. Yes you could use UserString but that also seems too excessive. Ruby allows redefining everything. However this can open a REAL can of worms in group environment greater than one! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
