[Python-3000] removing functions from string module (original) (raw)

Josiah Carlson jcarlson at uci.edu
Wed Apr 18 06:41:49 CEST 2007

"Steven Bethard" <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/17/07, Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu> wrote: > Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote: > > Neal Norwitz schrieb: > > > I'm tempted to ask the same thing about the types module. > > > > Don't forget the 'new' module. It's a candidate for 'svn rm'. > > > > """Create new objects of various types. Deprecated. > > > > This module is no longer required except for backward compatibility. > > Objects of most types can now be created by calling the type object. > > """ > > I would generally agree with you, except that when monkey patching > instances... > self.method = new.instancemethod(other.method.imfunc, > self, > self.class)

Yes, but you could just as easily write this as:: self.method = other.method.imfunc.get(self) which I'd contend is better than the original new.instancemethod version.

It is certainly easier to read, but I don't believe it is as self-documenting as the new.instancemethod variant. What do you get when calling 'new.instancemethod'? A new instance method.

Is func.get documented anywhere? I've never seen it before (which is why I use new).

Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote:

I strongly emphasize on "a bit more". One needs a lot of inside knowledge about internal representation to rebind a method to another instance. The following idea is much easier to understand:

self.method = boundmethod(self, methodorfunction)

I agree that the above is easier to understand, but boundmethod is not a builtin in 2.3, 2.4, or 2.5. Even with my own use-case of monkey patching instances with functions or methods, I would resist its inclusion as a builtin.

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list