Larry Hastings added the comment: > Not for builtin functions, but it's unclear to me why the API of > builtin functions should be different from that of Python functions > (except, as I said, for the existence of byte code).
I really don't follow you. You seem to be saying that __text_signature__ is a bad idea, and keep talking about existing APIs that provide for the same functionality, but you decline to name specifics. Be specific. Let's say we remove __text_signature__. How do we now write a C extension in a way that we can have introspection information for its callables? If __text_signature__ is redundant with existing APIs, then we should remove it now before 3.4 ships. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17159> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
