[Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3 (original) (raw)
Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Tue May 8 23:07:37 CEST 2012
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 5/8/2012 12:50 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On May 08, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
No, the "mcl" in the call is just the designated metaclass - the actual metaclass of the resulting class definition may be something different. That's why this is a separate method from mcl.new. I'm not completely sold on adding a class method to type, but I acknowledge that it's a convenient place to put it. Still, it doesn't feel particularly more right than adding it to say, the operator module.
The operator module strikes me as completely wrong. To me, a function that creates classes (types) belongs either in the types module or attached to the type metaclass. Attaching an alternate constructor to type as a class method would be analogous to attaching an alternate dict constructor to dict (.fromkeys).
-- Terry Jan Reedy
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]