On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Previously I posted PEP 560 two weeks ago, while several other PEPs were > also posted, so it didn't get much of attention. Here I post the PEP 560 > again, now including the full text for convenience of commenting. > > [..] > > After creating the class, > the original bases are saved in ``__orig_bases__`` (currently this is also > done by the metaclass). > > Those are *still* bases, right, even if they are not in the mro? I'm not sure if this is a naming thing or something even more. > NOTE: These two method names are reserved for exclusive use by > the ``typing`` module and the generic types machinery, and any other use is > strongly discouraged. > Given the situation, that may be a good thing. But will it really work? I think it is also strongly discouraged to invent your own dunder method names, but people still do it. > The reference implementation (with tests) can be found > in [4]_, the proposal was originally posted and discussed on > the ``typing`` tracker, see [5]_. > > > Backwards compatibility and impact on users who don't use ``typing``: > ===================================================================== > > This proposal may break code that currently uses the names > ``__class_getitem__`` and ``__subclass_base__``. > > ––Koos [..] -- + Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
