[Python-3000] Generic function PEP won't make it in time (original) (raw)

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Mon Apr 23 18:50:06 CEST 2007

On 23/04/07, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:

Here you go: [...] Any questions? :)

No :-)

I really do think that putting this in a PEP as it is, would be a good start.

That's pretty much it, for the generic function part. The interface part looks like the "recombinable interfaces" one I previously posted, where you simply subclass Interface, and you don't have to write any adapter classes, because the interface is its own adapter class. You just register methods for stuff.

Again, I'd argue for getting it in a PEP.

There are perhaps a few more details or features visible at this user level, but all the "interesting" stuff (i.e. wizardry and defense against the dark arts) takes place under the hood.

I don't see the harm in putting that in later - particularly if it means that the basic end user story is documented formally from the start in a PEP. If nothing else, it makes it easier for you to remind people that GFs are easy, without having to repeatedly post that example... :-)

Paul.

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list