"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/17/07, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Neal Norwitz schrieb: > > > > I'm tempted to ask the same thing about the types module. > > > > > > Don't forget the 'new' module. It's a candidate for 'svn rm'. > > > > > > """Create new objects of various types. Deprecated. > > > > > > This module is no longer required except for backward compatibility. > > > Objects of most types can now be created by calling the type object. > > > """ > > > > I would generally agree with you, except that when monkey patching > > instances... > > self.method = new.instancemethod(other.method.im_func, > > self, > > self.__class__) > > Yes, but you could just as easily write this as:: > > self.method = other.method.im_func.__get__(self) > > which I'd contend is better than the original new.instancemethod version.
It is certainly easier to read, but I don't believe it is as self-documenting as the new.instancemethod variant. What do you get when calling 'new.instancemethod'? A new instance method. Is func.__get__ documented anywhere? I've never seen it before (which is why I use new). Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I strongly emphasize on "a bit more". One needs a lot of inside > knowledge about internal representation to rebind a method to another > instance. The following idea is much easier to understand: > > self.method = boundmethod(self, method_or_function) I agree that the above is easier to understand, but boundmethod is not a builtin in 2.3, 2.4, or 2.5. Even with my own use-case of monkey patching instances with functions or methods, I would resist its inclusion as a builtin. - Josiah _______________________________________________ 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
