Issue 32332: Implement slots support for magic methods added in PEP 560 (original) (raw)

Issue32332

Created on 2017-12-15 06:47 by yselivanov, last changed 2022-04-11 14:58 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Pull Requests
URL Status Linked Edit
PR 4878 closed yselivanov,2017-12-15 06:48
Messages (4)
msg308365 - (view) Author: Yury Selivanov (yselivanov) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-12-15 06:47
I propose to add type slots for magic methods introduced by PEP 560. In the brief discussion on the mailing list Guido OK'd the idea: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-December/151262.html I'll submit a PR that implements this proposal by adding new 'tp_as_class' slot, that points to a PyClassMethods struct, that has two fields: `cm_getitem` and `cm_mro_entries`. Interestingly, when __class_getitem__ is implemented through the type/slots machinery it becomes a bit faster. Given the following microbenchmark: class Foo: def __class_getitem__(cls, o): return o for _ in range(3): t = time.monotonic() for i in range(10 ** 8): assert i == Foo[i] print(f'{time.monotonic() - t:.3f}s') I see these numbers for the master branch: 17.161s 17.024s 16.530s and these for the C-slots branch: 15.010s 15.693s 15.035s
msg308368 - (view) Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-12-15 07:51
This isn't so easy. You can't just access new slot, because this is binary incompatible. You should add new type flag, say Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_CLASS, set it for all classes with tp_as_class, and guard access to tp_as_class with if (!PyType_HasFeature(tp, Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_CLASS))
msg308397 - (view) Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-12-15 14:43
PR 4883 shows how magic methods for PEP 560 can be implemented without introducing new slots.
msg308399 - (view) Author: Yury Selivanov (yselivanov) * (Python committer) Date: 2017-12-15 14:56
Serhiy, I've tested METH_STATIC approach and it works just fine. Thanks for pointing that out! I agree that adding slots for something that's already possible is an overkill, so let's close this issue.
History
Date User Action Args
2022-04-11 14:58:55 admin set github: 76513
2017-12-15 14:56:42 yselivanov set status: open -> closedtype: enhancementmessages: + resolution: rejectedstage: patch review -> resolved
2017-12-15 14:43:15 serhiy.storchaka set messages: +
2017-12-15 07:51:15 serhiy.storchaka set nosy: + serhiy.storchakamessages: +
2017-12-15 06:48:54 yselivanov set keywords: + patchstage: patch reviewpull_requests: + <pull%5Frequest4772>
2017-12-15 06:47:42 yselivanov create