On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 12:46 AM, Jeroen Demeyer <j.deme...@ugent.be> wrote: > On 2018-04-02 12:39, INADA Naoki wrote: >> >> Thanks for writing such hard PEP. >> >> At first glance, it new type hierarchy seems OK. >> But I can't understand rational for new flags. > > > Which flags in particular do you mean? I just pushed an update explaining > the rationale of METH_ARG0_FUNCTION: > > https://github.com/jdemeyer/PEP-functions#replacing-tp_call-meth_arg0_function >
I meant all new flags. Please note that most PEP readers doesn't read calling implementation everyday. So it's unclear why METH_ARG0_NO_SLICE and METH_ARG0_FUNCTION should be added. Actual example for METH_USR* flags are healpful too. >> And it's very difficult to estimate runtime and maintenance cost of >> the PEP, without draft implementation. > > > Runtime cost: the goal is no slowdowns at all. > Good. > Maintenance cost: IMHO, this PEP simplifies functions in CPython by removing > special classes like method_descriptor so the effect should only be in the > good sense. > I can't imagine it until PoC implementation. >> FASTCALL is introduced in recently version, and it make implementation >> complicated. >> I'm afraid that this PEP make it worse. > > > What do you mean? I am not making any changes to METH_FASTCALL. > When METH_FASTCALL is added, many special casing are added to support it. I'm afraid adding new class means adding more special cases. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
