On Feb 26, 2006, at 7:58 PM, David Binger wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2006, at 11:22 AM, mario ruggier wrote:
>>
>> That aside ;-) I guess you do not like the recommendation of adding a
>> trailing underscore for clashing names? I.e. to get all_ and any_ ? I
>> do not care too much for how that looks either, but it probably will
>> confuse me less.
>
> I guess you should use "from qp.lib.spec import both as all_",
> or whatever.

Right, I was already doing "import both as all" but now have switched
back to using both as is. Not having the better name is a problem but
having a mismatch is also a problem. I prefer to keep the problem
simple ;)

> I think that the number of arguments actually is 2 in every
> case in our code, and these operators rarely appear anyway.
> Use (None, str) instead of both(None, str).

Yes, this is a nice aspect of spec, that it interpolates meta
information from "natural" objects specified as specs... in this case
the tuple, and None. I am not doing that in js, at least not yet,
although I do not see why it would not work even if js is less
introspective than python. So, so far I am requiring that a js spec be
an instance of a specific spec base class... and for what I need that
is more than fine, but will consider if doing similar as spec.py is a
good way to go in that context.

m.