Changes by Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
--
versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 3.2
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue3453
___
___
Eldar Abusalimov added the comment:
It is possible to get a partially initialized class from inside a custom mro().
And extending such type results in passing NULL to PySequence_List inside
mro_implementation, which in turn leads to PyErr_BadInternalCall. #22735 has a
test reproducing it
Ronald Oussoren added the comment:
I don't know if multiple inheritance is explicitly supported at the C level,
but it is possible to create an extension type with multiple base classes in
tp_bases.
--
nosy: +ronaldoussoren
___
Python tracker
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
My knowledge may be out of date, but I thought multiple inheritance was only
supported at the python level. If this is still the case, then no
initialization check is needed. (You cannot get an uninitialized type at
Roger Upole [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This doesn't address the discrepancy between tp_base and tp_bases.
If multiple bases are used, it's no longer 'good practice', it's an
absolute requirement. IMO, it should call PyType_Ready for all bases,
or none of them.
Since the code assumes
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
PyType_Ready is called for each class in tp_bases.
This is done in typeobject.c::best_base()
Isn't it the case in your program?
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Forget my last remark: it applies to heap types (created with
type_new()) and not to static types.
However, it seems that a non-ready class in tp_bases can happen only
when an extension type inherits from another extension type.
It is
Roger Upole [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
If that were the case, it wouldn't need to call PyType_Ready for
tp_base either. From stepping thru the code, there are several places
in the interpreter core that PyType_Ready is called for types whose
tp_base has not been initialized yet.
New submission from Roger Upole [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If a type's tp_base has not been initialized yet, PyType_Ready calls
itself for tp_base. However, it doesn't do the same for members of
tp_bases. The inheritance determinations assume that all bases are
ready, in particular that tp_mro is
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I believe that's because the bases are supposed to be ready at the time
a subclass is created.
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3453
10 matches
Mail list logo
