On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I haven't had the time to look into this, but it sounds unintuitive to > drop __reduce_ex__ which is supposed to be the "extended" IOW "newer" > version of the API compared to __reduce__ which was deemed to be > missing something. >
Well, the idea was not to drop __reduce_ex__, but to rename it to __reduce__. That said, I just realized that might not be a good idea after all. Since __reduce_ex__ as __reduce__ would mean that __reduce__ would need to always be called with the extra protocol argument, thus breaking code that defines __reduce__ as a method without argument. I first thought that by making the argument "optional" would avoid this, but that obviously won't work. So, forget that idea. -- Alexandre _______________________________________________ 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
