Guido van Rossum wrote:
No objection on targetting 2.6 if other developers agree. Seems this
is well under way. good work!
given that dir() is used extensively by introspection tools, I'm
not sure I'm positive to a __dir__ that *overrides* the standard
dir() behaviour. *adding* to the default
On 11/10/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
No objection on targetting 2.6 if other developers agree. Seems this
is well under way. good work!
given that dir() is used extensively by introspection tools, I'm
not sure I'm positive to a __dir__ that
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
No objection on targetting 2.6 if other developers agree. Seems this
is well under way. good work!
given that dir() is used extensively by introspection tools, I'm
not sure I'm positive to a __dir__ that *overrides* the standard
dir()
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I think that ought to go into the guidlines for what's an acceptable
__dir__ implementation. We don't try to stop people from overriding
__add__ as subtraction either.
to me, overriding dir() is a lot more like overriding id() than over-
riding +. I don't think an
On 11/10/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I think that ought to go into the guidlines for what's an acceptable
__dir__ implementation. We don't try to stop people from overriding
__add__ as subtraction either.
to me, overriding dir() is a lot more like