Paul Rubin wrote:
Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> writes:
Have you looked at Tim Sweeney's talk that I mentioned in another post?
http://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced-fp/docs/s...
I did. He gives a really nice use case for Python's ability to
dynamically modify classes imported from a library. (Were not you
arguing against that? Or was is someone else?)
He is talking about extending classes by something like inheritance,
not modifying them dynamically. This is also in the context of an
extremely powerful static type system with existential and dependent
types, and totality proofs for just about everything. That is about a
billion light years away from anything anyone has ever proposed for
Python.
If the library framework were written in Python, one would have a choice
between creating a parallel class hierachy (through inheritance) that
dupicates *every* class in the original hierachy and dynamically
patching just those classes that need to be changed. He only discussed
the former option because that was the only one available. If, for
instance, one only needed to change the base class, patching just that
would be much easier. Hence my comment.
tjr
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
