> You're dreaming of a utopia where computers just read our minds and > know what we're thinking. So what if I can pass 42 into an object. > What do I intend to happen with that 42? Do I want to add the element > to a list? Access the 42nd element? Delete the 42nd element? Let the > object pick a behavior at random?
Huh?, No the programmer has to think of how data interacts with his/her objects. It's just that *now* the language is wise enough to teach them to think about it. > So > what's the benefit of that over having the object implement the > __call__ method? You bring up an interesting subject. I think you could get rid of the __call__ special method on objects. I think this is the wrong view into the object universe or *data ecosystem*. > Also, why would we re-use the bit shift operators for message passing? > Just because C++ decided to overload the existing operators to mean > reading into and writing out of a stream doesn't mean it's a good > idea. You're right, perhaps there's a better set of symbols that suggest "moving data". Mark -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
