tuples, index method, Python's design

Paul Boddie paul at boddie.org.uk
Wed Apr 11 17:37:39 CEST 2007

On 11 Apr, 16:14, "Chris Mellon" <arka... at gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want a language that just adds whatever methods anyone thinks
> of, along with whatever aliases for it any can think of, to every data
> type, you know where to find Ruby.

Nobody is asking for Ruby, as far as I can see. I even submitted a
quick patch to provide tuple.index (a method that has already been
thought of), given the triviality of the solution, but you won't find
me asking for a bundle of different convenience methods with all their
aliases on every object, regardless of whether you can monkey-patch
them after the fact or not. For example:


There's a pretty big chasm between wanting to be able to apply
existing functionality exactly to a type which for some reason never
acquired it and embracing the method proliferation and other low-
hanging fruit-picking seemingly popular in Ruby. In observing this,
one can make objective decisions about things like this...


Note that, in that document, index and count are methods of
MutableSequence. Quite why this should be from a conceptual
perspective is baffling, but don't underestimate the legacy influence
in such matters.


More information about the Python-list mailing list