On 8/15/06, Paul Prescod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I totally do not understand the requirement for the dictionary and its extra > overhead.
Under your proposal, annotation consumer libraries have to provide wrappers for Python's built-in types, since the only way a library has of knowing whether it should process a given object is by applying a subclass test. Extending this same idea to static analysis tools, tools like pychecker or an optimising compiler would have to supply their own such wrapper classes. This would be a huge burden, not just on the authors of such tools, but also on those wishing to use these tools. I want people to be able to use Python's built-in types without ugly wrapper classes or any other similar impediments to their pre-existing Python workflow/thought patterns. Collin Winter _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
