[Python-Dev] Announcing PEP 436: The Argument Clinic DSL
larry at hastings.org
Fri Mar 1 00:02:58 CET 2013
On 02/26/2013 06:30 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 2/26/2013 1:47 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
>> I think positional-only functions should be discouraged, but we don't
> If I were writing something like Clinic, I would be tempted to not
> have that option. But I was actually thinking about something in the
> positional-only writeup that mentioned the possibility of adding
> something to the positional-only option.
Clinic needs to be usable for every builtin in order to be a credible
solution. And the positional-only approach to parsing is sufficiently
different from the positional-and-keywords approach that I couldn't
sweep the conceptual difference under the rug--I had to explicitly
support weird stuff like optional positional arguments on the /left/.
So I really don't have a choice. All we can do is say "please don't use
this for new code".
> As I understand it, C module files are structured something like the
> following, which is 'unusual' for a python file.
> def meth1_impl(...
> def meth2_impl(...
> class C:
> meth1 = meth1_impl
> meth2 = meth2_impl
At the moment Clinic is agnostic about where in Python the callable
lives. The "module name" in the DSL is really just used in
documentation and to construct the name of the static functions. So if
you specify a class name as your "module name" it'll work fine and look
correct. However, maybe we need to think about this a little more when
it comes time to add Signature metadata.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev