On 5/19/06, Tony Lownds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On May 19, 2006, at 1:52 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> Out of curiosity, are there concrete plans for how the type > >> annotation syntax for functions > >> translates into bytecode? > > > > I suspect rather similar to the way default parameter values are > > handled today: we generate bytecode that evaluates the type > > annotations and somehow saves them on the signature object which is > > part of the function object. > > Ok. I'm also wondering whether order of evaluation will be > constrained and > whether missing annotations result in a sentinel value or are just > missing. > > I'd propose that MAKE_FUNCTION's arg has a flag bit which indicates that > type annotations are present. If the flag is set, an integer value is > popped off > the stack which is used as a bit array to determine how the default > arguments > and type annotations are mixed. > > My apologies if this is getting too far ahead of the process.
I think you're ahead. Perhaps you could make some suggestions of what you'd like instead of asking (leading?) questions. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
