Hi Brett, On 18.08.17 18:31, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 at 02:05 Christian Tismer <tis...@stackless.com > <mailto:tis...@stackless.com>> wrote: > ...
> Is it a bad idea to support signatures in Python 2 as well? > Do I introduce a feature that should not exist in Python 2? > Or is it fine to do so? > > Please let me know your opinion, I am happy with any result. > > > If you're getting paid to do the port then I don't think it really hurts > anything since it isn't going to magically open Python 2 to more usage. > In fact, if you are filling in the annotation information so that type > hints are being exposed then maybe there's a chance it might help > someone port to Python 3? Well, I took extra precautions to make sure that existing PyCFunctions are not affected in any way. The new types are clones of the original types, and only PySide sees the additional attribute for it's functions. So, no, I don not create magically signatures for Python 2 functions. But I really warned my customer that the feature might not be welcomed for Python 2, and we might only enable it internally for testing. As said, I'm happy with either answer. Cheers -- Chris -- Christian Tismer :^) tis...@stackless.com Software Consulting : http://www.stackless.com/ Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : https://github.com/PySide 14482 Potsdam : GPG key -> 0xFB7BEE0E phone +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 (30) 700143-0023
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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
