Neil Girdhar writes:

Has there been any progress with PEP 487? I am finding myself writing a lot of boilerplate because of Python's so-called "metaclass hell". What are the problems with PEP 487?

According to the PEP, the code (metaclass, now in version 1.1 on PyPI) is in a module on PyPI and in successful use at least by the author. The PEP proposes adding it to the stdlib after experience with the PyPI module. @Martin: The section Connections to Other PEP begins, "This is a competing proposal to PEP 422". I suggest some kind of clarification that PEP 422 has been withdrawn. Something like "This is a competing proposal to PEP 422 (withdrawn in favor of this PEP) ...", or even just adding "(withdrawn)". (I know the header says "replaces", which is why I find the current wording confusing.) Steve

Neil Girdhar writes:

Has there been any progress with PEP 487? I am finding myself writing a lot of boilerplate because of Python's so-called "metaclass hell". What are the problems with PEP 487?

According to the PEP, the code (metaclass, now in version 1.1 on PyPI) is in a module on PyPI and in successful use at least by the author. The PEP proposes adding it to the stdlib after experience with the PyPI module. @Martin: The section Connections to Other PEP begins, "This is a competing proposal to PEP 422". I suggest some kind of clarification that PEP 422 has been withdrawn. Something like "This is a competing proposal to PEP 422 (withdrawn in favor of this PEP) ...", or even just adding "(withdrawn)". (I know the header says "replaces", which is why I find the current wording confusing.) Steve