From: "Alex Martelli" email@example.com
On Monday 30 September 2002 02:36 am, David Abrahams wrote:
I note that http://www.python.org/dev/doc/devel/lib/built-in-funcs.html#l2h-14 describes dict as a built-in function, whereas we all know that Guido's cool 2.2 changes made it into a type
Does this distinction matter? A little, I think. Calling it a function makes it sound like we're living in the past. Same goes for str, type, list, tuple, et. al. I realize that the type (especially <type 'type'>) acts like a function under many circumstances...
Trying to cover both 2.1 and 2.2 in the coming Nutshell, I've resorted to periphrases such as "the built-in dict" or "the dict built-in" (the
uses "built-in" as a noun, I'm not yet sure the editor will let that go
I've also tried to use 'callable' systematically instead of 'function' wherever other callables (types, bound-methods, etc) can be substituted in lieu of functions. In documenting 2.2 or 2.3 only, I think such
is not warranted. It's important, when feasible, to clarify what
are types -- a type has MORE functionality than a function, after all (in particular, one can subclass it, while one can't subclass a function).
It's probably also worth noting that the dict type is not documented anywhere, except as a function.