On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:37 AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> http://bugs.python.org/issue3247 complains that with python 3.0, dir() >> of a SRE_Match object returns an empty list. >> >> This type has the particularity to not define a tp_methods; instead, >> its tp_getattr slot calls Py_FindMethod(match_methods, self, name) >> where "match_methods" is a PyMethodDef[] array that looks very very >> similar to a typical tp_methods slot. >> >> Py_FindMethod has a trick: when the requested name is "__methods__", >> it returns the names of the PyMethodDef items. >> >> __methods__ has disappeared with python 3.0, and indeed if I enable >> the "-3" warning flag on python2.6, >> dir() on a SRE_Match object raises two (!) warnings: >> __main__:1: DeprecationWarning: __methods__ not supported in 3.x >> __main__:1: DeprecationWarning: __members__ and __methods__ not supported in >> 3.x >> >> According to previous discussions: >> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-July/008787.html >> Py_FindMethod is not needed any more in modern modules, and should go away. >> Note that PyMember_Get has already disappeared, because the few >> modules using them were deleted... >> >> Is it still time for such a change after beta1? > > I'd say definitely. This just fell through the cracks. > >> There are ~30 occurrences of Py_FindMethod in the code base. >> Most of the time, it is enough to remove the call, and set the >> tp_methods members. > > Good! > >> Another thing: why was traceback.__dir__ added? >> the current 3.0 produces: >>>>> dir(b.__traceback__) >> ['tb_frame', 'tb_lasti', 'tb_lineno', 'tb_next'] >> >> When I remove the __dir__ method, I get the special methods as well: >>>>> dir(b.__traceback__) >> ['__class__', '__delattr__', '__doc__', '__eq__', '__format__', >> '__ge__', '__getattribute__', '__gt__', '__hash__', '__init__', >> '__le__', '__lt__', '__ne__', '__new__', '__reduce__', >> '__reduce_ex__', '__repr__', '__setattr__', '__sizeof__', '__str__', >> '__subclasshook__', 'tb_frame', 'tb_lasti', 'tb_lineno', 'tb_next'] >> >> It's more verbose, but most types have the same list of special >> members. I suggest to remove it, to enhance consistency (loosing some >> 2.6 compatibility, but it's python3.0 after all) > > Can't tell you why -- looks odd to me too. Hopefully Collin Winter remembers.
My recollection is that this was done to preserve compatibility with 2.x, which has this behaviour; there were some tests that iterated the list of members or something like that. Collin _______________________________________________ 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
