I discussed this approach with Guido in private e-mail a few months back during discussion about an article I was writing for DDJ about decorators. We also discussed something very similar to 'update_meta()', but never settled on a name. Originally he wanted me to PEP the whole thing, but he wanted it to include optional type declaration info, so you can probably see why I haven't done anything on that yet. :)
However, if we can define a __signature__ format that allows for type declaration, I imagine there'd be little problem with moving forward on it.
But one of the reasons for providing 'update_meta' is so that additional metadata (like __signature__) can later be added transparently.
Does deciding whether or not to supply the function really need to be dependent on whether or not a format for __signature__ has been chosen?
Cheers, Nick.
P.S. the patch is currently deficient in the test and documentation departments, so it's formally incomplete, but I figure it makes sense to finish the discussion before sorting those out.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://boredomandlaziness.skystorm.net
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
