I haven't seen any strong objections, so I would like to go ahead and
commit PEP 3155 (*) soon. Is anyone against it?
I'm not against it, but I have some questions.
Does you a working implementing?
Do you have a patch for issue #9276 using __qualname__? Maybe not a
fully working patch, but a proof-of-concept?
Could you add examples on instances? I suppose that it gives the same
result than classes:
C.__qualname__ == C().__qualname__
C.f.__qualname__ == C().f.__qualname__
Le 19/11/2011 00:15, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
> I'd like the PEP to explain why this is a better solution than
> re-establishing introspectability that was available through
> unbound methods.
__qualname__ works also on nested functions. Is it a new feature? Or was
it already possible in Python 2 to compute the qualified name?
Victor
_______________________________________________
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
