At 04:10 PM 4/30/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>And don't get me started abut __init__. Constructors don't do
>cooperative MI, period.
Actually, metaclass __init__'s do. In fact, they *have to*.
Right now, we get away with it because the type(name, bases, dict)
signature is fixed. Once w
On 4/30/07, Lino Mastrodomenico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/4/30, Tim Delaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Fine with me. Calvin - want to send me your latest draft, and I'll do some
> > modifications? I think we've got to the point now where we can take this
> > off-list.
>
> One more thing: what
On 4/30/07, Lino Mastrodomenico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2007/4/30, Tim Delaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Fine with me. Calvin - want to send me your latest draft, and I'll do
some
> modifications? I think we've got to the point now where we can take this
> off-list.
One more thing: what do peo
On 4/30/07, Lino Mastrodomenico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One more thing: what do people think of modifying super so that when
> it doesn't find a method instead of raising AttributeError it returns
> something like "lambda *args, **kwargs: None"?
To me, the most important change is correctnes
2007/4/30, Tim Delaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Fine with me. Calvin - want to send me your latest draft, and I'll do some
> modifications? I think we've got to the point now where we can take this
> off-list.
One more thing: what do people think of modifying super so that when
it doesn't find a met
From: "Collin Winter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 4/30/07, Tim Delaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Would you prefer me to work with Calvin to get his existing PEP to match
>> my
>> proposal, or would you prefer a competing PEP?
>
> Please work together with Calvin. One PEP is enough.
Fine with me
