[Python-Dev] Updated: PEP 359: The make statement

2006-04-18 Thread Steven Bethard
I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. The patch is available at: http://bugs.python.org/1472459 and I've pasted the full text below. I've tried to be more explicit about the goals -- the make statement is mostly syntactic sugar for:: class name tuple:

Re: [Python-Dev] Updated: PEP 359: The make statement

2006-04-18 Thread Brett Cannon
Definitely an intriguing idea! I am +0 just because I don't know how needed it is, but it is definitely cool. As for your open issues, ditching __metaclass__ is fine if this goes in, but I would keep 'class' around as simplified syntactic sugar for the common case. -Brett On 4/18/06, Steven

Re: [Python-Dev] Updated: PEP 359: The make statement

2006-04-18 Thread Steven Bethard
On 4/18/06, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. The patch is available at: http://bugs.python.org/1472459 and I've pasted the full text below. I've tried to be more explicit about the goals -- the make statement is mostly

Re: [Python-Dev] Updated: PEP 359: The make statement

2006-04-18 Thread Gustavo Niemeyer
Removing __metaclass__ in Python 3000 - As a side-effect of its generality, the make-statement mostly eliminates the need for the ``__metaclass__`` attribute in class objects. Thus in Python 3000, instead of:: (...) One of the reasons that this PEP was

Re: [Python-Dev] Updated: PEP 359: The make statement

2006-04-18 Thread Gustavo Niemeyer
Consider it dead. =) RIP. ;) -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: