On Sa, 2016-09-10 at 12:01 +0200, Sebastian Berg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> from the discussion, I was thinking maybe something like this:
>
> class B():
> def __numpy_getitem__(self, index, indexing_method="plain"):
> # do magic.
> return super().__numpy_getitem__(
> index, indexing_method=indexing_method)
>
> as new API. There are some issues, though. An old subclass may define
> `__getitem__`. Now the behaviour that would seem nice to me is:
>
> 1. No new attribute (no `__numpy_getitem__`) and also no
> `__getitem__`/`__setitem__`: Should just work
> 2. No new attribute but old attributes defined: Should at
> least give a warning (or an error) when using the new
> attributes, since the behaviour might buggy.
> 3. `__numpy_getitem__` defined: Will channel all indexing through it
> (except maybe some edge cases in python 2). Best, also avoid that
> use getitem in setitem trick If you define both (which might
> make sense for some edge case stuff), you should just channel it
> through this yourself.
>
Maybe in shorter; I would like to know if a subclass:
1. requires no fixup
2. may need fixup
3. supports everything.
And I am not sure how to approach this.
> Now the issue I have is that for 1. and 2. to work correctly, I need
> to
> know which methods are overloaded by the subclass. Checking is a bit
> tedious and the method I hacked first for getitem and setitem does
> not
> work for a normal method.
>
> Can anyone think of a nicer way to do this trick that does not
> require
> quite as much hackery. Or is there an easy way to do the overloading
> check?
>
> - Sebastian
>
> ___
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
