STINNER Victor <victor.stin...@gmail.com> added the comment: > Victor's use case is unique in that he needs the type > to be implemented in C.
mxProxy, zope.proxy and zope.security implement object proxies in C (for security purpose). These proxies are not specific to dict, but are generic. dictproxy is already used in Python by the type.__dict__ descriptor getter of new-style classes since Python 2.2, since this changeset: changeset: 18933:09df3254b49d branch: legacy-trunk user: Tim Peters <tim.pet...@gmail.com> date: Thu Aug 02 04:15:00 2001 +0000 files: Include/Python.h Include/abstract.h Include/ceval.h Include/classobject.h Include/descrobject.h Include/dictobject.h Include/eval.h Include/func description: Merge of descr-branch back into trunk. Guido van Rossum wrote in its rejection notice of the PEP 416: "On the other hand, exposing the existing read-only dict proxy as a built-in type sounds good to me. (It would need to be changed to allow calling the constructor.) GvR." -- > To that end, it would be okay to expose _dictproxy > but not to make it a documented type. My sandbox only needs the issue #14385, pysandbox can implement its own dictproxy class. If the issue #14385 is accepted, pysandbox can use any mapping, even a mapping implemented in Python! It's just simpler to implement a secure proxy in C. So this issue is not directly related to sandboxing. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14386> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
