Am 01.05.2013 20:04, schrieb Eli Bendersky:
Actually, in flufl.enum, IntEnum had to define a magic __value_factory__ attribute, but in the current ref435 implementation this isn't needed, so IntEnum is just:
class IntEnum(int, Enum): ''' Class where every instance is a subclass of int. '''
So why don't we just drop IntEnum from the API and tell users they should do the above explicitly, i.e.:
class SocketFamily(int, Enum): AF_UNIX = 1 AF_INET = 2
As opposed to having an IntEnum explicitly, this just saves 2 characters (comma+space), but is more explicit (zen!) and helps us avoid the special-casing the subclass restriction implementation.
Wait a moment... it might not be immediately useful for IntEnums (however, that's because base Enum currently defines __int__ which I find questionable), but with current ref435 you *can* create your own enum base classes with your own methods, and derive concrete enums from that. It also lets you have a base class for enums and use it in isinstance(). If you forbid subclassing completely that will be impossible. Georg