On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 04:54:22PM +0000, Michael Selik wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:33 PM Paul Moore firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
There's almost no room for improvement in those two use cases, and yet people still like the idea of "not repeating the name".
And some people don't!
In fact, I often use namedtuple with a dynamic __name__ and fields, without changing the identifier.
Record = namedtuple(name, fields)
If I use that in half my code, but then in the other half, something like
Record => namedtuple(fields)
That's TIMTOWTDI. I'd rather standardize.
That's fine. Nobody is going to force you to change.
I'm not proposing any changes to namedtuple at all -- its others who want to change it to take just a single argument and have an wrapper function to specify the field names. I'm against that rather strongly.
I haven't seen an explanation of how this proposal would simplify Django.
I fear I may have been mislead by Sven, who made comments about this being useful for Django, but hasn't given any examples yet.