Why not 3.__class__ ?
michael at rcp.co.uk
Tue Oct 9 18:24:23 CEST 2001
Paul Rubin <phr-n2001d at nightsong.com> wrote in
news:7x4rp8q1cy.fsf at ruckus.brouhaha.com:
> How about (3).foo?
I should have tried it before posting. This (and 3 .foo) already works in
Python 2.1 (complains "'int' object has no attribute 'foo'", of course), so
I would have thought the entire discussion was pointless: nothing needs to
be changed to get the desired behaviour!
More information about the Python-list