[Python-Dev] Should we do away with unbound methods in Py3k?
Nick Coghlan
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sun Nov 25 04:36:26 CET 2007
Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> Also, there was discussion of this before:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/050625.html
> -- why didn't we decide to do it then?
Skimming that thread, the issues seem to be:
- worse error messages from explicit base class calls if you forget
to supply self
- breaking code that uses im_func, im_class, im_self
This led to a mixture of a few +1's and several -0's, so it didn't happen.
Py3k severely reduces the weight of the latter objection though, and we
can use the Py3k warnings feature in 2.6 to complain if any code
attempts to access im_self, im_class or im_func on an instancemethod
object when im_class is None.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list