On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 April 2015 at 08:24, Martin Teichmann <lkb.teichm...@gmail.com> wrote: > However, I'm also now wondering if it may be possible to reach out to > the pylint authors (similar to what Brett did for the "pylint --py3k" > flag) and ask for a way to make it easy to register "base class, > decorator" pairs where pylint will complain if it sees a particular > method decorator but can't determine at analysis time if the named > base class is in the MRO for the class defining the method.
Will it *also* check the calling chain of the decorator, or any other thing that's called or invoked in the class body,to find out if somewhere, somehow, it asks for a class decoration? If not, it's not going to help with this use case. There are many ways to solve this problem by re-adding a hook -- you and I have proposed several, in 2012 and now. There are none, however, which do not involve putting back the hookability that Python 3 took out, except by using hacks like sys.set_trace() or monkeypatching __build_class__. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
