On 2006-08-27, Jacob Hallen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Patrick Maupin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately there is a side effect to slots. They change the behaviour of
> the objects that have slots in a way that can be abused by control freaks
> and stat
Dieter Maurer wrote:
> "Patrick Maupin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 26 Aug 2006 12:51:44 -0700:
> > ...
> > The only
> > problem I personally know of is that the __slots__ aren't inherited,
>
> "__slots__" *ARE* inherited, although the rules may be a bit
> complex.
Yes, I didn't write that corr
"Patrick Maupin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 26 Aug 2006 12:51:44 -0700:
> ...
> The only
> problem I personally know of is that the __slots__ aren't inherited,
"__slots__" *ARE* inherited, although the rules may be a bit
complex.
>>> class B(object):
... __slots__ = ('f1', 'f2',)
...
>>> cla
"Jacob Hallen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unfortunately there is a side effect to slots. They change the behaviour
of
> the objects that have slots in a way that can be abused by control freaks
> and static typing weenies. This is bad, because the contol freaks s
Jacob Hallen wrote:
> Patrick Maupin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Also, as I noted, I _do_ use them on occasion, so if there really _are_
> >potential pitfalls there, I would like to understand exactly what they
> >are, so my ears perk up whenever I notice a __slots__ discussion, but
> >so far I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Patrick Maupin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I didn't actually sense any dander on your part, so it was probably a
>bit unfortunate that I chose to respond to that particular message. I
>do (rightly or wrongly) sense some dander on Aahz's part, and this was
>the secon
Patrick Maupin wrote:
> The only assertion that was made explicitly enough to be testable came
> about in a followup to Aahz's original post, only AFTER someone asked
> what the side-effects associated with __slots__ were. Aahz responded:
>
> > The main one is that inheritance becomes difficult t
Jarek Zgoda wrote:
> Having that said, should we hope __slots__ would disappear in (some)
> future (tomorrow?!, in next 10 microseconds?!)? Please, don't left us
> hopeless.
>
Are you saying you _do_ hope that __slots__ disappear? Why?
Regards,
Pat
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Aahz> Taking a look at __slots__ is fine as long as you don't actually
> Aahz> use them.
>
> Gabriel> Why?
>
> Skip>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/451ad25f9c648404/f4ac2dfde32b16fd?lnk=st&q=Python+__slots__+aahz&rnum=
[EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a):
> That said, It's not mentioned on the Python3.0 page of the wiki:
>
> http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3.0
>
> or in PEP 3000:
>
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3000/
>
> and I see no discussion about it in the Python 3000 mailing list archives:
>
Aahz> Taking a look at __slots__ is fine as long as you don't actually
Aahz> use them.
Gabriel> Why?
Skip>
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/451ad25f9c648404/f4ac2dfde32b16fd?lnk=st&q=Python+__slots__+aahz&rnum=2#f4ac2dfde32b16fd
Patrick>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Aahz> Taking a look at __slots__ is fine as long as you don't actually
> Aahz> use them.
>
> Gabriel> Why?
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/451ad25f9c648404/f4ac2dfde32b16fd?lnk=st&q=Python+__slots__+aahz&rnum=2#f4ac2dfde32b16
Aahz wrote:
> Taking a look at __slots__ is fine as long as you don't actually use them.
I remember the recent discussion about such matters... but I don't
understand its dangers fully still.
I assume __slots__ may be removed in Python 3.0, but maybe "experts"
need it now an then. Or maybe a "expe
Aahz> Taking a look at __slots__ is fine as long as you don't actually
Aahz> use them.
Gabriel> Why?
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/451ad25f9c648404/f4ac2dfde32b16fd?lnk=st&q=Python+__slots__+aahz&rnum=2#f4ac2dfde32b16fd
Skip
--
http://mail.pyt
At Friday 25/8/2006 11:34, Aahz wrote:
>The results seem okay. Python is a dynamic language, object attributes
>(and methods, etc) are kept inside a dict, where you can add and remove
>them when you like. So using a dict is faster.
>You can also take a look at __slots__
Taking a look at __slots_
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Andre Meyer:
>>
>> Is the test meaningful and are you surprised by the results?
>> I am, actually, because I would have assumed that attribute access
>> with an object should be faster because lookup can be precompiled.
>
>The results see
16 matches
Mail list logo
