Ram Rachum <cool...@cool-rr.com> added the comment: > [...] try to whip up a patch and upload it if it ends up not too hackish.
To have a non-hackish patch we need a non-hackish idea. The `.__parent_class__` idea looks hackish to me, but now that I think about it, how is it more hackish than a function's `.__module__` attribute? I mean, a function's `.__module__` attribute says on which module the function was originally defined, but the function could be accessible on any other module and any other namespace or class. Its `.__module__` would remain constant, because it's the one place where you are guaranteed to be able to find the function, assuming it's defined in the top-level. So the `.__module__` attribute is used in unpickling the function. How is the `.__parent_class__` suggestion more hackish than `.__module__`? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9276> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
