Andrew Barnert writes:
On Jun 26, 2019, at 21:45, Stephen J. Turnbull email@example.com wrote:
Chris Angelico writes:
Then I completely don't understand getself. Can you give an example of how it would be used? So far, it just seems like an utter total mess.
It's possible that __getself__ would be implemented "halfway". That is, if __getself__ is present, it is invoked, and performs side effects (a simple example would be an access counter/logger for the object). Then the compiler loads that object, discarding any return value of the method. I think this is the semantics that the proponents are thinking of.
The compiler has to load the object before calling __getself__, not after, or it has nothing to call __getself__ on, right?
Correct. I should have said "leaves the object alone rather than substituting the value of the method".
Anyway, I don’t think this really avoids most of the problems.
Agreed. I just thought that it was worth clarifying that __getself__ could be entirely about side effects by definition.
And I think everything else is an inherent consequence of trying to answer “I want to hook this operation on variables”
Yeah, I really don't understand why this is desirable in Python, but if it is,
“here’s an hook on values instead”
is not the way to do it. All roads lead to "We don't need a proof of concept implementation, we need a proof of utility application."