Guido's new method definition idea

Lie Ryan lie.1296 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 9 22:28:37 CET 2008


On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:55:16 +0000, Arnaud Delobelle wrote:

> anthony.tolle at gmail.com writes:
> 
>> class C:
>>     def createfunc(self):
>>         def self.func(arg):
>>             return arg + 1
>>
>> Or, after the class definition is done, to extend it dynamically:
>>
>> def C.method(self, arg):
>>     self.value = arg
>>
>> ...which would be the equivalent of the following:
>>
>> def method(self, arg):
>>     self.value = arg
>> C.method = method
> 
> What about the following then?
> 
> functions = {}
> 
> def functions['square'](x):
>     return x*x
> 
> def functions['cube'](x):
>     return x**3
> 
> --
> Arnaud

-1. In most cases, it would generally be better as:

def functions(x):
    return x.func()

since the rule-of-thumb of OOP is that objects should do things by 
itself. This is also more in line with python's built-in functions, which 
merely calls the appropriate __special__ names.

and whenever creating an object is too complex, that could easily be
def functions(which, x):
    def _function_square():
        return x*x
    def _function_cube():
        return x**3

    d = {'square': _function_square, 
         'cube': _function_cube,
        } 

    return d[which]()




More information about the Python-list mailing list