On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Hrvoje Niksic <hrvoje.nik...@avl.com> wrote: > On 05/07/2012 02:15 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> Benjamin's suggestion of a class method on type may be a good one, >> though. Then the invocation (using all arguments) would be: >> >> mcl.build_class(name, bases, keywords, exec_body) >> >> Works for me, so unless someone else can see a problem I've missed, >> we'll go with that. > > > Note that to call mcl.build_class, you have to find a metaclass that works > for bases, which is the job of build_class. Putting it as a function in the > operator module seems like a better solution.
No, the "mcl" in the call is just the designated metaclass - the *actual* metaclass of the resulting class definition may be something different. That's why this is a separate method from mcl.__new__. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
