On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Christian Heimes <li...@cheimes.de> wrote: > Am 22.06.2012 20:52, schrieb Guido van Rossum: >> (5) Too bad there's no proposal for adding signatures to builtin >> functions/methods, but understood. > > Larry et al. did an experiment with a mutable __signature__ attribute to > PyCFunction. He immediately backed out and removed the attribute as I > explained that it breaks isolation between subinterpreter instances.
Good point. Maybe the PEP could explain this (remember that a good PEP also mentioned some rejected ideas and the reason why they were rejected). > The PEP is already complex enough and went to several incarnations. It > was a wise decision to focus on the features that could be implemented > before the first beta is released. Kudos for pulling it off, Larry! Indeed, limiting the scope in this way was very wise. > Signatures for builtin functions should be handled by a new PEP. We need > a way to extract or define the signatures (perhaps parse the C code and > parse PyArg_* signatures) and a secure way to store the signature > (perhaps implement the signature class in C?). That's a LOT of work. Agreed it's an open problem. I just hope someone will tackle it next. -- --Guido van Rossum (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
