[IronPython] 2.1 Branch in Codeplex Sources

[Dino Viehland]

FYI __dir__ support works in 2.0 already:

IronPython 2.0 (2.0.0.0) on .NET 2.0.50727.3053
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> class x(object):
...     def __dir__(self):
...             return ['abc']
...
>>> a = x()
>>> dir(a)
['abc']

I implemented it so that the "GetMemberNames" specially named .NET method we use for the same purpose would have something to map onto in Python.  So one 2.6 feature down, tons to go :)

-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Michael Foord
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 1:59 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] 2.1 Branch in Codeplex Sources

Dino Viehland wrote:
>
> There will certainly be some 2.6 features. But we still haven't quite
> figured out what "2.1" is yet. So if there's a particular 2.6 feature,
> or if you'd just like us to see us do them all, let us know - same
> goes for other features, fixes, misc improvements, etc...
>
+1 for with statement available without future import
+1 for new syntax for exception handling
+1 for class decorators (+1000 for using them to provide attribute support)
+1 for hasattr not discarding all exceptions
+1 for being able to provide keyword arguments after *args
+1 for getter, setter and deleter on properties (damn useful)
+1 for __dir__ support

+lots for implementing ctypes (not really related but thought I would
throw it in)

Abstract Base Classes are nice, not sure if I'll use them for a while
though.

New string formatting can blow.

Michael
>
> *From:* users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com
> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] *On Behalf Of *Vernon Cole
> *Sent:* Friday, October 31, 2008 6:02 PM
> *To:* Discussion of IronPython
> *Subject:* Re: [IronPython] 2.1 Branch in Codeplex Sources
>
> "IronPython 3k"... does that mean that IPy 2.1 is targeted to be
> compatible with CPython 2.6?
> (Please say "yes"!)
> --
> Vernon Cole
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Dino Viehland <dinov at microsoft.com
> <mailto:dinov at microsoft.com>> wrote:
>
> Just one other comment on top of what Curt said. You might more
> properly think of Main as IronPython 3k. Main includes a ton of
> renames and other breaking made in
> Microsoft.Scripting.Core/System.Core that will end up in .NET 4.0.
> We're still working on what we want to do for 2.1 (and input is always
> welcome of course) but our current thinking is that it will be API
> compatible w/ 2.0.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>


--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at lists.ironpython.com
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com