On Monday, February 11, 2013 7:52:24 AM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: > [...] > But my statement wasn't based on my own knowledge of the stdlib, but > rather on this: > > On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: > > I'm a bit unnerved by the sum function. Summing a > > sequence only makes sense if the sequence in question > > contains /only/ numeric types. For that reason i decided > > to create a special type for holding Numerics. > > Why create a special type if it already exists?
Because at the time i made this statement we were discussing 100% true OOP (you know, the kind of paradigm where object definition identifiers start with a capital letter? *estoeric-wink*), but more importantly because i don't find the current implementation of array and list to be consistent. > Yep. By the way, how does the help function fit into your wonderfully > OOP model? What's it a method on? Well since /all/ objects will have help available it should be defined Object#help and then propagate downwards. But even true OOP languages need a few global functions... *gasp*... oh yes! A few that come to mind include: globals, locals, vars, compile, eval, exec, input, print, dir And don't forget, we still have module namespace to deal with! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
