On 14 November 2017 at 09:41, Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On 10 November 2017 at 17:43, Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> There seem to be some action items from this thread that I haven't seen >>> reflected in the PEP source code yet. >>> [...snip...] >>> Then the next step I propose is a PR with a full implementation. After >>> that I'll likely approve the PEP (or we'll have minor feedback based on >>> trying the implementation). >> >> >> Yes, sorry, I wanted to make updates to the PEP and reference >> implementation, >> but last two weeks were very busy. >> Hopefully, I will work on it this weekend. > > 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. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
