Re: PEP 420: Implicit Namespace Packages

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Barry Warsaw <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 02, 2012, at 08:32 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
> >Both, actually. I had expected that new API (i.e. a new method of some
> kind)
> >would be necessary, so it has elegance that this is not required.  OTOH,
> >explicit type checking is despised in the OO world, and varying result
> types
> >are disliked by Guido van Rossum (not sure whether this reservation
> applies
> >to this case as well, or only to cases where the return type depends on
> the
> >parameter types).
>
> My understanding (and I'm sure Guido will correct me if I'm wrong) is that
> it's the latter: return type should not depend on function argument values.


This is how I interpreted Guido's preference (e.g. return bytes or str
based on whether an argument(s) is bytes or str).

_______________________________________________
Import-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/import-sig