On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:39 am, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Steve D'Aprano wrote: >> "source_" is already a public name, which means that users could want to >> create fields with that name for some reason, > > They could equally well want to define their own private > field called "_source".
Um... well, people want to do all sorts of wild and wacky things... but why would you define a named tuple with *private* fields? Especially since that privateness isn't enforced when you access the items by position. In any case, the namedtuple API prohibits that, so it isn't an option. -- Steve “Cheer up,” they said, “things could be worse.” So I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
