In python, you don't need overloading, you have a variety of optional parameter mechanisms. I think the "member functions" issues from C++ don't apply to Python becuase C++ is strongly typed, meaning that many similar functions have to be written with slightly different type signatures. The lack of strong typing makes it practical to write generic operations. I find that use of free functions defeats good object-oriented design and leads to functionality being informally bound by a cluster of free functions that have similar names. I'm suspicious of this, finding it tiresome to maintain and debug. --- "Martin v. Loewis" <martin@v.loewis.de> wrote:
Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes:
Is this still relevant to Python? Why are C++ member functions difficult to generic programs? Does the same apply to Python methods?
In a generic algorithm foo, you can write
def foo1(x): bar(x)
if you have global functions. With methods, you need to write
def foo1(x): x.bar()
which means that bar must be a method of x. This might be difficult to achieve if x is of a class that you cannot control. In C++, it is then still possible to define a function
def bar(x of-type-X): pass
which, by means of overload resolution, will be found from foo1 automatically.
In Python, this is not so easy since you don't have overloading.
Regards, Martin
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
===== -- S. Lott, CCP :-{) S_LOTT@YAHOO.COM http://www.mindspring.com/~slott1 Buccaneer #468: KaDiMa Macintosh user: drinking upstream from the herd. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com