On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:08 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 08:21:01AM -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> > I just came across a code snippet that
> > would define a method with the "__dict__" name - like in:
> >
> > class A:
> > def __dict__(self):
> > return ()
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 at 05:09 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 08:21:01AM -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> > I just came across a code snippet that
> > would define a method with the "__dict__" name - like in:
> >
> > class A:
> > def __dict__(self):
> > return ()
>
>
The deadline is a week from today, April 18th 2018. Original
announcement below.
--
It’s that time again: time to start thinking about the Python Language
Summit! The 2018 summit will be held on Wednesday, May 9, from 10am to
4pm, at the Huntington Convention Center in Cleveland, Ohio,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 08:21:01AM -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> I just came across a code snippet that
> would define a method with the "__dict__" name - like in:
>
> class A:
> def __dict__(self):
> return ()
That's a strange thing to do, but I don't think it ought to be illega
I just came across a code snippet that
would define a method with the "__dict__" name - like in:
class A:
def __dict__(self):
return ()
The resulting class's instances can be assigned
dynamic attributes as usual, but one can never acess
its actual local variables through instance.__
On 2018-04-10 13:49, Nick Coghlan wrote:
If it's only a semantic level change in the way the macro gets
expanded, then whether or not it needs an ABI version guard gets
judged on a case-by-case basis, and in this particular case, my view
would be that developers should be able to write extensions
