On 5 May 2013 16:17, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:

On 05/04/2013 10:59 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:

On 05/04/2013 08:50 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:

2. Instead of directly setting the _name and _value of the enum_item, it lets the Enum class do it via Enum.__init__().

Subclasses can override this. This gives Enums a 2-phase construction just like other classes.

Not sure I care for this.  Enums are, at least in theory, immutable objects, and immutable objects don't call __init__.

Okay, still thinking about `value`, but as far as `name` goes, it should not be passed -- it must be the same as it was in the class definition

Agreed - name should not be passed.

I would have preferred to use __new__, but Enum.__new__ doesn't get called at all from enum_type (and the implementation wouldn't be at all appropriate anyway).