[Python-Dev] Possible rough edges in Python 3 metaclasses (was Re: Language reference updated for metaclasses) (original) (raw)

Ethan Furman ethan at stoneleaf.us
Tue Jun 5 01:43:21 CEST 2012

Nick Coghlan wrote:

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:58 AM, PJ Eby wrote:

The reason for wanting this to be transparent is that 1) if you forget the redundant class-decorator, mixin, or metaclass, stuff will silently not work, Why would it silently not work? What's preventing you from having decorators that create wrapped functions that fail noisily when called, then providing a class decorator that unwraps those functions, fixes them up with the class references they need and stores the unwrapped and updated versions back on the class. You call it redundant, I call it explicit.

The first time you specify something, it's explicit; if you have to specify the same thing a second time, it's redundant; if this was a good thing why do we say DRY so often?

Ethan

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list