On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 11:35:14 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> writes:
>
>> Hmm. I do not like the replace() as suggested.
>>
>> Firstly, replace is a verb, and I would normally read
>> td.replace(microseconds=0) as an instruction to modify td in place.
>> Traditionally, such methods in python return None.
>
> I agree with this objection. A method that is named “replace”, yet does
> not modify the object, is badly named.
py> 'badly named'.replace('badly', 'well')
'well named'
"replace" is a perfectly reasonable name for a method which performs a
replacement, whether it replaces in place (for mutable objects) or makes
a copy with replacement (for immutable objects). What else would you call
it?
py> ('well named'.
... make_a_copy_while_simultaneously_performing_a_replacement_on_the_copy
... ('well', 'excessively long')
... )
'excessively long named'
While explicit is better than implicit, sometimes you can be *too*
explicit.
If timedelta objects were mutable, then I would expect that you would
just write the fields directly:
td.microseconds = 0
rather than mess about with a replace method.
--
Steven
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
