This should be worked into a PEP, instead of living on as a bunch of python-ideas posts and blogs.

I find the attrs documentation (and Glyph's blog post about it) almost unreadable because of the exalted language -- half the doc seems to be *selling* the library more than *explaining* it. If this style were to become common I would find it a disturbing trend.

But having something alongside NamedTuple that helps you declare classes with mutable attributes using the new PEP 526 syntax (and maybe a few variants) would definitely be useful. Will someone please write a PEP? Very few of the specifics of attrs need be retained (its punny naming choices are too much for the stdlib).

--Guido

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 14 May 2017 at 17:12, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer <arj.python@gmail.com> wrote:
> Whatever you all propose,
>
> coming from a java and c++ background, OOP in python is quite cumbersome.
>
> if you tell that i am not a python guy, then consider that current oop style
> does not reflect python's style of ease and simplicity
>
> is __init__ really a good syntax choice?

That's a different question, and one with a well-structured third
party solution: https://attrs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/

See https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2017-April/045514.html
for some ideas on how something like attrs might be adapted to provide
better standard library tooling for more concise and readable class
definitions.

Cheers,
Nick.

--
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/



--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)