At 01:37 PM 7/18/2007 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote: >Phillip J. Eby wrote: > > It allows the framework to bootstrap via successive > > approximation. Initially, the 'implies()' function is just a plain > > function, and then it later becomes a generic function. (And of > > course it gets called in between those two points.) The same happens > > for 'disjuncts()' and 'overrides()'. > >But you know from the outset that these functions will >eventually become generic, so why can't they be defined >as some callable object that can have its insides >switched, if you're on a Python whose normal function >objects don't allow that?
Well, phrased that way, it sounds like a justification for treating it as a porting strategy for such Pythons. The library could just use a "copy_code(srcfunc, dstfunc)" function that's implemented differently on different Pythons. _______________________________________________ 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
