From: "Just van Rossum" <just@letterror.com>
> Thomas Heller wrote:
>
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=9ss15a%2414snvc%242%40ID-59885.news.dfncis.de
>
> Nice! Maybe I wouldn't have missed that if hadn't been part of the "IsPython
> really O-O?" thread...
Well, I had problems at that time posting at all, so finally it escaped
without a changed subject ;-)
>
> I think it's worth playing with this stuff more. One improvement I would like to
> try is to update methods just like global functions: that way existing callbacks
> that are bound methods will also be updated.
Great idea!
>
> Other nits:
> func_defaults and func_doc should definitely be updated, I'm not sure about
> func_dict.
>
> General question: why if func_globals not a writable attribute?
Dont' know, but it can be modified (although this is dangerous):
>>> def f(): pass
...
>>> f.func_globals
{'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, '__name__': '__main__',
'__doc__': None, 'f': <function f at 0x00767F08>}
>>> f.func_globals.clear()
>>> f
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
NameError: name 'f' is not defined
>>>
I intend to update this stuff stealing from your ideas, but probably
python-dev is not the correct place to discuss this (IMO).
Should I post it again (with a better subject) to python-list,
and we continue there?
Thomas
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4