On 7/19/2012 9:54 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:53:27 +0300
M Stefan wrote:
Hey,
As part of pickle4, I found it interesting to add the possibility
of pickling bound functions (instance methods). This is done by
pickling f.__self__ and f.__func__ separately, and then adding
a
On 19/07/2012 7:54pm, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Instead of a specific opcode, can't you use a suitable __reduce__
> magic (or __getnewargs__, perhaps)? We want to limit the number of
> opcodes except for performance-critical types (and I don't think
> bound methods are performance-critical for the p
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:53:27 +0300
M Stefan wrote:
> Hey,
>
> As part of pickle4, I found it interesting to add the possibility
> of pickling bound functions (instance methods). This is done by
> pickling f.__self__ and f.__func__ separately, and then adding
> a BIND opcode to tie them together.
The issue is http://bugs.python.org/issue15397 [Stefan accidentally replied
privately to me]
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM, M Stefan wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> As part of pickle4, I found it interesting to add the possibility
>> of pickl
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM, M Stefan wrote:
> Hey,
>
> As part of pickle4, I found it interesting to add the possibility
> of pickling bound functions (instance methods). This is done by
> pickling f.__self__ and f.__func__ separately, and then adding
> a BIND opcode to tie them together.
>
Hey,
As part of pickle4, I found it interesting to add the possibility
of pickling bound functions (instance methods). This is done by
pickling f.__self__ and f.__func__ separately, and then adding
a BIND opcode to tie them together.
While this appears to work fine for python methods (non-builti
