items = []
items.append("shrooms")
items.append("meth")
items.append("weed")
// FAKE METHOD::
items.amount() // should return 3
How I do it right?
views:
1140answers:
2That isn't very OOP, wtf Python is noobly
Joshua
2009-11-11 00:32:54
"isn't very OOP"? Semantics decides whether a solution is OO, not syntax. There's no difference between `len(items)` and `items.len()`.
John Millikin
2009-11-11 00:34:59
You could say items.__len__() if you really need object.method syntax.
Corey Porter
2009-11-11 00:35:26
Actually, it's a standard way of asking any sequence or mapping for its length. Seems pretty object oriented to me.
gnud
2009-11-11 00:36:41
\_\_methods\_\_ are not supposed to be called directly.
Juanjo Conti
2009-11-11 00:38:22
Re: the assertion that `len(foo)`"isn't very OOP": seems to display a distressingly "cargo cult" mentality. It isn't OOP if it doesn't "look OOPy?" `len()` attempts to call the `__len__()` method on any object that has it (internally using introspection in the process). This is perfectly object oriented.
Jim Dennis
2009-11-11 01:26:26
+9
A:
The len function can be used with a lot of types in python - both built-in types and library types.
>>len([1,2,3])
3
gnud
2009-11-11 00:33:22
If making it cosmetically more OOP is important to you .. call the `.__len__()` method on it. `[0,1,3].__len__()` -> 3
Jim Dennis
2009-11-11 00:40:02
I gave answer to you cause you werent mean and condescending in your answer!!
Joshua
2009-11-11 01:10:46