True, False, None

Alex Martelli aleax at
Wed Nov 12 10:12:42 CET 2003

Michele Simionato wrote:
> BTW, I would have been favorable to "Staticmethod", "Classmethod",
> "Super", etc. since they are all classes. But it is useless to protest now
> :-(

Well, understanding is never useless.  So could you please clarify why
you think of (e.g.) staticmethos as needing a different capitalization
from (e.g.) int?

>>> type(staticmethod)
<type 'type'>

>>> type(int)
<type 'type'>

Why is staticmethod "a class" to you while int presumably isn't?

To me, personally, all of this debates only underscores yet again the
one serious "ergonomic" defect in Python's syntax -- case sensitivity.

The desire to distinguish between uppercased "classes" and lowercased
"types" when they're becoming undistinguishable by design in the
language is (in my warped worldview) due to having case sensitivity
in the language at all.  Ah well, I've basically lost that debate in
the past, already!


More information about the Python-list mailing list