Mostly historical reasons I guess, we started with static types because
most class extension examples were using it, and it worked for all we did
at the time (including the __class__ assign trick). We then got hit by the
change, and solved the issue by patching python.
Now keeping our own patched
So the question remains -- why not use a heap type?
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 2:05 AM Greg wrote:
> As I introduced (a long time ago) this demand, let me add my grain of salt
> here.
>
> The use case is pretty simple, and somewhat common when writing manually C
> extension class: The reason to
this was something that would indeed need more
discussion and might get acceptance if discussed once again.
Eloi
From: Brett Cannon
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 8:53 PM
To: Eloi Gaudry
Cc: encu...@gmail.com; python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally
As I introduced (a long time ago) this demand, let me add my grain of salt
here.
The use case is pretty simple, and somewhat common when writing manually C
extension class: The reason to write extension class is usually
performance, or link into an existing library.
When doing this manually
again)
I feel sorry if that only resulted in looking like I was repeating myself.
Have a good day,
Eloi
From: Guido van Rossum
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 7:20 PM
To: Eloi Gaudry
Cc: Python-Ideas ; Serhiy Storchaka
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
Hey
: encu...@gmail.com; python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > I mean, to my knowledge, there is no reason why a type should be
> >
access to any of its
> type attributes
>
> Petr, what do you think ?
>
> Eloi
> --
> *From:* Python-ideas
> on behalf of Eloi Gaudry
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 8, 2018 9:26:47 AM
> *To:* encu...@gmail.com; python-ideas@python.org
> *Subject
eds is clearly not taken into account.
>
> --------------
> *From:* Python-ideas
> on behalf of Eloi Gaudry
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 21, 2018 5:26:37 PM
> *To:* python-ideas@python.org; encu...@gmail.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types
flected on the capabilities the first would have somewhere then.
From: Eloi Gaudry
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:27:18 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
some literature:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-February/
@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > I mean, to my knowledge, there is no reason why a type should be
> > allocated on the heap (https://docs.pyt
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > I mean, to my knowledge, there is no reason why a type should be
> > allocated on the heap (https://docs.python.org/2/c-api/typeobj.html
> > ) to
> > be able to change its attributes at Python
On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to bring back this discussion (from 2005, by Greg):
https://bugs.python.org/issue1229239
Briefly, non-heap types cannot have their
attributes changed by Python code. This makes sense for python builtin
types, but not for the types defined in
Hi,
I'd like to bring back this discussion (from 2005, by Greg):
https://bugs.python.org/issue1229239
Briefly, non-heap types cannot have their
attributes changed by Python code. This makes sense for python builtin
types, but not for the types defined in extension/modules.
As we have been using
13 matches
Mail list logo
