[Python-Dev] Classes that claim to be defined in __builtin__ but aren't

[Michael Hudson]

James Y Knight <foom at fuhm.net> writes:

> There's a fair number of classes that claim they are defined in
> __builtin__, but do not actually appear there. For example:

"__builtin__" is the "I don't know" answer in type_module for
non-HEAPTYPEs.  I'm certainly not sure that's totally wise...

> IMO classes ought to actually appear in __builtin__ if they claim they
> are defined there. Doing otherwise breaks reflection, as you have to
> add a special case for these class names to use the appropriate object
> from the types module instead. Thoughts? If it isn't desirable to have
> these names appear in __builtin__, perhaps their '__module__' should
> be changed to another module where they are defined?

Such as?  There really isn't a module where e.g. GeneratorType is
defined.

Cheers,
mwh

-- 
3. Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon.
  -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html