Armin Rigo added the comment: ...but yes, it's very obvious that exposing _PyType_Lookup() to pure Python is the right thing to do here. This is a central part of the way Python works internally, after all.
Moreover, sorry about my previous note: if we started today to write PyPy, then it would be enough to have the pure Python version of operator.index(), based on the newly exposed _PyType_Lookup(). With PyPy's JIT, there is no real performance loss. Some of my confusion came from the fact that there *would* be serious performance loss if we had to work with the pure Python looping-over-__mro__-and-fishing-in-__dict__ version. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue18712> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
