On 2018-03-23 00:36, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
It does make sense, since the proposal sounds ambitious (and perhaps
impossible without breaking compatibility).
Well, *some* breakage of backwards compatibility will be unavoidable.
My plan (just a plan for now!) is to preserve backwards compatibility in
the following ways:
* Existing Python attributes of functions/methods should continue to
exist and behave the same
* The inspect module should give the same results as now (by changing
the implementation of some of the functions in inspect to match the new
classes)
* Everything from the documented Python/C API.
This means that I might break compatibility in the following ways:
* Changing the classes of functions/methods (this is the whole point of
this PEP). So anything involving isinstance() checks might break.
* The undocumented parts of the Python/C API, in particular the C structure.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
