[Python-Dev] Adding types.build_class for 3.3 (original) (raw)
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu May 10 03:45:50 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 Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
Python is not Java -- we have modules. Something should only go in a class namespace if it somehow relates to that particular class, and other classes could might implement it differently. That's not the case with buildclass().
Not true - you will get a type instance out of any sane call to type.define(). Technically, you could probably declare your metaclass such that you get a non-type object instead (just as you can with a class definition), but that means you're really just using an insanely convoluted way to make an ordinary function call. If you didn't want to invoke the full PEP 3115 find metaclass/prepare namespace/execute body/call metaclass dance, why would you be calling type.define instead of just calling the metaclass directly?
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- 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 ]