Raymond Hettinger added the comment: -1 on this proposal. We haven't really seen a need for this in practice. And such as change would be likely create unforeseen consequences to existing code.
The proposal is at odds with the existing design. Python internals work by checking for whether a given slot is filled-out. Trying to make these lookups transparent to __getattr__ calls would be tricky at best (we can't know what __getattr__ does without calling it) and definitely not fast. Even if it could be done easily, I would still prefer the current design which requires explicit delegation of magic methods by proxy objects. FWIW, me made the same decision for super() objects ( https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#super ): """ Note that super() is implemented as part of the binding process for explicit dotted attribute lookups such as super().__getitem__(name). It does so by implementing its own __getattribute__() method for searching classes in a predictable order that supports cooperative multiple inheritance. Accordingly, super() is undefined for implicit lookups using statements or operators such as super()[name]. """ For the reasons listed above and those listed by Steven, I'm marking this as closed/rejected. Thank you for the suggestion, but we need to decline. ---------- assignee: -> rhettinger resolution: -> rejected stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue30352> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
