python2.2: type('name') -> <type 'str'> ??
frandebo at latt.if.usp.br
Wed Jul 25 18:24:20 CEST 2001
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Tim Peters wrote:
> > >>> type('')
> > <type 'str'>
> > while I expected to get <type 'string'>.
> No, that's the way it works (today). Under the type/class unification
> scheme, type names also work as constructors. Since str() was always the
> way to build a string in Python, that's a natural name for its type.
> Note this cute consequence:
> >>> x = 1L
> >>> type(x)(3)
> That is, type() in 2.2a1 truly returns a constructor, and type(1L)(y) is the
> same as long(y). Likewise for
> >>> type("abc")(42)
> >>> type("abc") is str
> >>> type(1L) is long
Thank you for the examples, it helped me to understand what the change
> I'm not sure the type names will stay this way, but determining that is part
> of what an alpha release is for. On a scale of 1 to 12, were you merely
> surprised by the change or truly upset <wink>?
Hum, if type() is going to work as a contructor I think it's better to
have the type('') as <type 'str'>. But yes, I was surprised since I
didn't knew this change was going to happen and just a little upset
because there is no explicit mention to changing type _names_ in
the "Release Notes" at SourceForge (the very first place I went).
thank you (and to Guido) for the help,
São Paulo, Brasil.
More information about the Python-list