Paul Rubin a écrit :
Bruno Desthuilliers <bdesth.quelquech...@free.quelquepart.fr> writes:
We're not talking about libraries here.
Yes we are. If the default is "non-dynamic", then a class author is in
charge of explicitely allowing it when *he* see fits.
Oh, I see what you mean, the standard libraries would be affected if
the language default were to tone down the dynamism. True.
Not only the standard lib. Quite a lot of frameworks relies on these
features.
As long as it's up to the *user* to choose, that's ok. Your "@dynamic"
class decorator doesn't have the same implications.
Well, you could use it on library classes too:
from library import Libclass
Libclass = dynamic(Libclass)
...
That's fine when you directly use the class. Not when you work with
instances provided by a framework (or another lib) that won't be
affected by your above rebinding.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
