2 ms·
> convert [dicts] immediately to data structures providing semantics [...] You can simplify your work by employing a library that makes “better classes” for you
by pansa2 2y ago
> convert [dicts] immediately to data structures providing semantics [...] You can simplify your work by employing a library that makes “better classes” for you
Python seems to have many different kinds of "better classes" - the article mentions `dataclass` and `TypedDict`, and AFAIK there are also two different kinds of named tuple (`collections.namedtuple` and `Typing.NamedTuple`).
What are the advantages of these "better classes" over traditional classes? How would you choose which of the four (or more?) kinds to use?
- pansa2 2y agoTo me, the proliferation of "better classes" implies there's a problem with Python's built-in classes - but what's wrong? Are they just too flexible and/or too verbose? Or actually deficient in some way?
- zmgsabst 2y agoPeople enjoy the flexibility and many Python systems rely on duck-typing via dicts, etc. So people are trying to force Python to be something it isn’t in adherence to their ideology — but it fails to gain consensus because there’s a sizable cohort that use Python because it isnt those things. So we get repeated implementations, from each ideologically motivated group.