[Python-ideas] PEP 560 (second post)
k7hoven at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 06:45:07 EST 2017
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 November 2017 at 09:41, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > Thanks, I am happy now with the PEP, except for one detail: maybe
> > `__mro_entry__` should always return a tuple and then maybe renamed to
> > `__mro_entries__`. (See debate at
> > https://github.com/python/peps/pull/460#issuecomment-343969528 .)
> I like that - very nice refinement.
I hope the order in which multiple __mro_entries__ will appear in the mro
will be documented clearly, regardless of how obvious it might feel. It
might take a while, before anyone notices that something weird happens
because they did it the wrong way around.
Out of curiosity, what kind of cases would benefit from __mro__entries__
being able to return two
Also, I'm still wondering about __bases__ and __orig_bases__. Could we call
these __concrete_bases__ and __bases__ instead (respectively)?
For an explanation of why I think this might be a good idea, see this new
+ Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas