On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree "named values" would get us *most* of the value, and would both be less contentious and provide a common building block for third party libraries to build interesting and perhaps esoteric uses on.
I *like* grouped named values (I think they make nice apis to read and use when used appropriately), but hey-ho.
These could be two separate features. Named values could be a building block for a built-in Enum type -- the named value would take care of the str() and repr(), while the Enum type would only have to take care of the nice syntax ("class Color(Enum): red = 1; ...") and just create a bunch of named values in the class scope. The metaclass would do something like "for key in classdict: classdict[key] = namedvalue(key, classdict[key])" (though it would probably have to skip certain keys). -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)