
Paul Moore wrote:
2009/2/27 Benjamin Peterson <benjamin@python.org>:
2009/2/27 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> schrieb:
I should have a PEP (and implementation) ready for alpha 2 to address the current discrepancy between contextlib.nested and actual nested with statements: http://bugs.python.org/issue5251
If you do add a reference to that bug report to the release PEP, mark fixing it as a maybe though - with the associated PEP not even written yet, I obviously still have some work to do to get the semantic change approved by Guido and the rest of python-dev. Ok. I've added it.
Is it worth getting simplegeneric exposed in 3.1 (http://bugs.python.org/issue5135)? If it's going to be in 2.7, I'd like to see it hit 3.1. The patch is against trunk (for 2.7) at the moment, I'm not sure what the process would be for forward-porting it (do I generate a new patch against the py3k branch, or should it be applied to trunk and merged in?)
As much as I'd like to get a simple generic implementation into functools, the lack of support for ABCs still bothers me (despite my last post about that on the tracker item). I'd be a -0 on it going in as is, but if someone can figure out a clever way of supporting ABCs without completing killing the invocation speed for generics, that would go up to a +1. (The current difficulty of this may actually reflect a more significant limitation on the available metadata for ABCs in PEP 3119: it is easy to ask "is this specific type an example of this ABC?", but difficult to ask "which ABCs is this type as example of?". For actual inheritance, the __mro__ attribute means that both questions are easy to answer, but I'm not aware of any corresponding way of answering the latter question for ABCs) Cheers, Nick. P.S. I just unassigned myself from that tracker item - I'm going to have my hands full working on the proposed change to the with statement. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------