[Python-Dev] PEP 520: Ordered Class Definition Namespace (round 3)

[Émanuel Barry]

> From: Eric Snow
> Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 10:37 PM
> To: Python-Dev; Guido van Rossum
> Subject: [Python-Dev] PEP 520: Ordered Class Definition Namespace (round
> 3)


> The only change to the original proposal
> has been that a manually set __definition_order__ must be a tuple of
> identifiers or None (rather that using the value as-is).


>   1. if ``__definition_order__`` is defined in the class body then it
>      must be a ``tuple`` of identifiers or ``None``; any other value
>      will result in ``TypeError``

Why not just any arbitrary iterable, which get converted to a tuple at
runtime? __slots__ allows any arbitrary iterable:

>>> def g():
...   yield "foo"
...   yield "bar"
...   yield "baz"
>>> class C:
...   __slots__ = g()
>>> C.__slots__
<generator object g at 0x0074A9F0>
>>> C.__slots__.gi_running
False
>>> dir(C)
[<snip>, 'bar', 'baz', 'foo']

> Use of a tuple reflects the fact that we are exposing the order in
> which attributes on the class were *defined*.  Since the definition
> is already complete by the time ``definition_order__`` is set, the
> content and order of the value won't be changing.  Thus we use a type
> that communicates that state of immutability.

Typo: missing leading underscores in __definition_order__

> Compatibility
> =============
> 
> This PEP does not break backward compatibility, except in the case that
> someone relies *strictly* on ``dict`` as the class definition namespace.
> This shouldn't be a problem.

Perhaps add a mention that isinstance(namespace, dict) will still be true,
so users don't get unnecessarily confused.

> <class>.__dict__ as OrderedDict
> -------------------------------

<class> looks weird to me. I tend to use `cls` (although `klass` isn't
uncommon). `C` might also not be a bad choice.

Thanks!
-Emanuel