Am 26.10.2010 22:28, schrieb Peter Ingebretson: > --- On Tue, 10/26/10, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: >> I think this then mandates a PEP; I'm -1 on the feature also. > > I am happy to write up a PEP for this feature. I'll start that > process now, though if anyone feels that this idea has no chance of > acceptance please let me know.
If it could actually work in a reasonable way, I would be +0. If, as I think, it can't possibly work correctly, I'll be -1. In this evaluation, I compare this to Smalltalk's Object>>#become: What you propose should have a similar effect, IMO, although it's probably not necessary to provide the two-way nature of become: Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ 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
