I guess Carl's messages put an end to this proposal as it is.
>From "the language side", I can think of nothing short of actually
transforming _in place_ (like it is possible with instances of
ordinary classes when you assign then a new "__class__") the
"forward referenced object" into the complet
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 9:24 AM Patrick Reader <_...@pxeger.com> wrote:
> I've just noticed Modules/rotatingtree.{h,c}, which don't seem to be
> used anywhere. Are they just dead code? If so, is there a reason they
> haven't been removed?
>
grep -R rotatingtree ; grep -R _lsprof
rotatingtree is
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 10:20 AM Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
>
> I am not worried about the bikeshed part of which syntax to use -
> and more worried with the possible breaking of a lot of stuff, unless
> we work with creation of a non-identical "forward object" that is
> rebound, as in plain name bin
I've just noticed Modules/rotatingtree.{h,c}, which don't seem to be
used anywhere. Are they just dead code? If so, is there a reason they
haven't been removed?
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pytho
I am not worried about the bikeshed part of which syntax to use -
and more worried with the possible breaking of a lot of stuff, unless
we work with creation of a non-identical "forward object" that is
rebound, as in plain name binding, when the second part
is declared. I've stated that amidst my r
Hi Larry,
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 1:53 AM Larry Hastings wrote:
> But rather than speculate further, perhaps someone who works on one of the
> static type analysis checkers will join the discussion and render an informed
> opinion about how easy or hard it would be to support "forward class" an
On 4/24/2022 5:42 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
What's the use case for arbitrary expressions vs. a (possibly
qualified) name? A class factory that produces forward declarations?
Do you have a use case in mind?
It's:
x.py:
--8<
forward class A()
--8<
x_impl.py
Larry Hastings writes:
> On 4/22/22 19:36, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > How about a 'regular' class statement with a special marker of some
> > sort. Example: 'body=None'.
>
> It's plausible. I take it "body=None" would mean the declaration would
> not be permitted to have a colon and a class
