the origin of this feature disappearing for built-in types:
http://bugs.jython.org/issue1058
'''
object.__set/delattr__ allow modification of built in types, this isknown as the Carlo Verre hack:
Jython 2.3a0+ (trunk:4630:4631M, Jun 14 2008, 20:07:38)[Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (Apple Inc.)] on java1.5.0_13Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.>>> object.__setattr__(str, 'lower', str.upper)>>> 'dammit Carlo!'.lower()'DAMMIT CARLO!''''
but I do not see any reason why having an explicit flag for python extensions written in C to declare their types as static struct, and still be able to change their __setattr__, __getattr__, etc. slots would not make sense.
extensions and core types have not the same constraints and purposes, this should be reflected on the capabilities the first would have somewhere then.
From: Eloi Gaudry
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:27:18 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)some literature:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-February/077180.html
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-February/077169.html
where it is stated that python C struct type should not be able to have their attributes changed.
but the extension needs is clearly not taken into account.
From: Python-ideas <python-ideas-bounces+eloi.gaudry=fft.be@python.org> on behalf of Eloi Gaudry <Eloi.Gaudry@fft.be>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 5:26:37 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org; encukou@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)This request didn't have a lot of traction, but I still consider this is something that would need to be supported (2 lines of code to be changed; no regression so far with python 2 and python 3).
My main points are:
- HEAP_TYPE is not really used (as anyone being using it ?)
- HEAP_TYPE serves other purposes
- extension would benefit for allowing direct access to any of its type attributes
Petr, what do you think ?
Eloi
From: Python-ideas <python-ideas-bounces+eloi.gaudry=fft.be@python.org> on behalf of Eloi Gaudry <Eloi.Gaudry@fft.be>
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 9:26:47 AM
To: encukou@gmail.com; python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > I mean, to my knowledge, there is no reason why a type should be
> > allocated on the heap (https://docs.python.org/2/c-api/typeobj.html
> > ) to
> > be able to change its attributes at Python level.
>
> One reason is sub-interpreter support: you can have multiple
> interpreters per process, and those shouldn't influence each other.
> (see https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/init.html#sub-interpreter-suppor
> t)
>
> With heap types, each sub-interpreter can have its own copy of the
> type
> object. But with builtins, changes done in one interpreter would be
> visible in all the others.
Yes, this could be a reason, but if you don't rely on such a feature
neither implicitly nor explicitly ?
I mean, our types are built-in and should be considered as immutable
across interpreters. And we (as most users I guess) are only running
one interpreter.
In case several intepreters are used, it would make sense to have a
non-heap type that would be seen as a singleton across all of them, no
?
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/