On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Glenn Linderman <v+python at g.nevcal.com> wrote:
> On 4/25/2013 9:19 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Glenn Linderman <v+python at g.nevcal.com>
> wrote:
>> an enumeration of objects whose class defines __call__ would
> not be so weird.
>> Seriously? You'd complexificate the basic usage in order to cater for
> such an esoteric use case? The *only* use cases that matter at all for
> enum values are ints and strings, and even the latter could be
> considered a luxury when compared to other languages' enums.
>>> No, I'd look for a solution/implementation that doesn't divide objects into
> "plain" and "esoteric" cases. Py3 now treats everything as objects. So an
> enumeration should be able to deal with any object as a value.
I think you've lost track of the Zen of Python.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
