Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Given that the error is of limited value and that otherwise the
> unbound method behaves exactly the same as the original function
> object, I'd like to see if there are strenuous objections against
> dropping unbound method objects altogether (or at least not using them
> in this case), so that explicit super calls (via the unbound method)
> may go a little faster. Also, it would make it easier to fix this
> issue: http://bugs.python.org/issue1109
Assuming the proposal is simply to change function.__get__ to return
self when the second argument is None, then +1.
The method descriptors for types written in C should continue to return
a wrapper which performs the typecheck, as C method implementations tend
to assume that the self argument is guaranteed to be of the correct
type. Having to perform that check manually would be rather tedious.
This does introduce a new discrepancy between types implemented in C and
Python classes, but I suspect that the underlying difference in memory
layout restrictions is always going to leak through in at least a few
places.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
