On Jul 20, 2017 1:13 AM, "David Mertz" <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote: I'm concerned in the proposal about losing access to type information (i.e. name) in this proposal. For example, I might write some code like this now:
from collections import namedtuple Car = namedtuple("Car", "cost hp weight") Motorcycle = namedtuple("Motorcycle", "cost hp weight") smart = Car(18_900, 89, 949) harley = Motorcyle(18_900, 89, 949) if smart==harley and type(smart)==type(harley): ... print("These are identical vehicles")
The proposal to define this as:
smart = (cost=18_900, hp=89, weight=949) harley = (cost=18_900, hp=89, weight=949)
Doesn't seem to leave any way to distinguish the objects of different types that happen to have the same fields. Comparing ` smart._fields==harley._fields` doesn't help here, nor does any type constructed solely from the fields. What about making a syntax to declare a type? The ones that come to mind are name = (x=, y=) Or name = (x=pass, y=pass) They may not be clear enough, though.