Brian Blais wrote: > I have found a very similar problem trying to replace a method using a > function defined in pyrex.
Functions defined in Pyrex are C-implemented functions, which don't trigger the method binding magic when you access them through a class. The same thing happens if you try to use a built-in function as a method. What *should* work is to define the method inside a class in Pyrex (plain class, not extension type) and extract it out of the class's __dict__. That's because Pyrex pre-wraps a function defined in a class in an unbound method object before putting it in the class. I have suggested that builtin functions should be given the same method-binding behaviour as interpreted functions. The idea wasn't rejected out of hand, but I don't think anything has been done about it yet. -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list