[Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k? (original) (raw)
Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Sat Nov 24 06:17:44 CET 2007
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Nov 22, 2007 11:12 PM, Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote: > It looks like we're in agreement to drop unbound methods and have a > reasonable set or arguments around it (e.g. keep staticmethod, no > changes to methods of builtin types, etc.). Do we need a PEP? It's > essentially a 2-line change in funcobject.c (funcdescrget()) -- plus > fixing up half a dozen or so unittests that specifically seem to test > the behavior of unbound methods.
I'd like to help but after staring at the code for 10 minutes I still don't get how the descriptor function should be altered. Can you please give an example to a mer mortal? :)
Index: Objects/funcobject.c
--- Objects/funcobject.c (revision 59154) +++ Objects/funcobject.c (working copy) @@ -643,8 +643,10 @@ static PyObject * func_descr_get(PyObject *func, PyObject *obj, PyObject *type) {
if (obj == Py_None)obj = NULL;
if (obj == Py_None || obj == NULL) {Py_INCREF(func);return func;} return PyMethod_New(func, obj, type);
}
[well, except those should be tabs not spaces]
-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]