I'm okay with bytearray not being subclassable in 2.6 as a temporary measure. I wouldn't want that to leak into 3.0 though, and I'd rather have it subclassable in 2.6 as well. I wonder why it doesn't work in 2.6 but does work in 3.0?
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christian Heimes schrieb: > > > Hello! > > > > I've successfully back ported the bytearray type and the io module from > > 3.0 to 2.6. The code is available in the branch trunk-bytearray [1]. I'm > > down to four failing byte tests and one failing io test. The failing > > byte tests are all related to pickling and subclassing. > > > > I like to get the remaining tests fixed for the upcoming release in a > > week. Please checkout the branch and help me figure out the remaining > > issues. > > Follow up: > > All failing bytearray tests were caused by subclasses of bytearray. I've > removed the Py_TPFLAGS_BASETYPE flag for now. Are you fine with the > inclusion of bytearray although it can't be subclassed? > > I'm going to fix the last io bug now. I like to merge the backport of > bytearray and io before the next alpha gets shipped out. > > Christian > -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
