"C.T. Matsumoto" <tmatsumoto@[...].net>  wrote 

>  class Foo: # the book says this is a class header
>     pass

Hmm, that's pretty dubious usage of header in my view. 
Its the class definition and there is nothing "header" about it.

>  As for my question it looks like the convention is if a class only has
>  operator overloading then the class receives a lowercase class name.

Hugo and Tim have answered that. Pep 8 says no, but local 
standards may over-rule that.

It is worth pointing out however that classes which only have 
operator overloads in them are pretty rare! Especially ones 
that don't inherit from an existing type or class.

The Indexer example is not very typical, a pseudo list 
where the content that is apparently always twice the index.
I can see it being used to save space where the 
alternative would be a list comprehension like:

myIndexer = [2*n for n in range(bugnum)]

It would also guarantee that you never had an index out of range.

But personally even there I'd generalise it by passing in a function
so that the Indexer could return any function of the index:

class Indexer:
     def __init__(self, func = lambda n: n):
          self.func = func
     def __getitem__(self, index)
          return self.func(index)

doubles = Indexer(lambda n: n*2)
squares = Indexer(lambda n: n*n)
plus3s = Indexer(lambda n: n+3)

etc.

But its certainly not exactly a typical scenario.

-- 
Alan Gauld
Author of the Learn to Program web site
http://www.alan-g.me.uk/

_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist  -  Tutor@[...].org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor