[Python-Dev] PEP 203 Augmented Assignment
Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:13:16 +0200
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 12:03:39PM -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > So backwards compatibility is out ? I'm not sure howmany Python code
> > uses slice-objects, but I would consider it a (personal ;) failure if
> > slicing has to be *broken* before it can be fixed.
> Huh? I thought I proposed a b/w compat solution:
> IF there is a __getslice__ method:
> IF the slice step is None:
> call __getslice__(lo, hi)
> ELSE: # the slice step is not None
> call __getslice__(lo, hi, step)
> What's wrong with that?
Well, what happens if __getslice__ and __getitem__ both exist, and
__getitem__ is used to handle extended slices, but __getslice__ isn't (yet)?
Currently, if it's a single item, __getitem__ is called. If it's a basic
slice, __getslice__ is called. If it's an extended slice, __getitem__ is
In the above picture, __getslice__ would be called instead, with the 'wrong'
number of arguments, and the use of extended slices would break.
> > If we can't figure out whether a function supports the 'new syntax'
> > reliably, I don't see how we can transform the error message either. I'll
> > bet inspecting the __getitem__ method to find out whether it supports the
> > one or the other is way too much of a runtime penalty to suffer at each
> > index.
> No, we don't deal with __getitem__; if *it* doesn't support a tuple
> containing slice objects, tough luck.
Sorry, that was my feebleness popping up. I was talking about __getslice__.
How do we find out if __getslice__ accepts 4 arguments, rather than 3 ?
Thomas Wouters <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!