From: "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@lemburg.com> > "Martin v. Loewis" wrote: > > > > > Indeed -- and I have a question there: why did you have to implement > > > this as meta-type ? > > > > MAL, please do read the patch discussion first, at > > > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=305470&func=detail&aid=462296 > > The discussion on SF doesn't really answer my question. What > Nick did is fascinating: he reused the type object implementation > to mimic a sequence ! That's cool, but looks like an awfully > tricky way of doing something straight forward such as sub-classing > the tuple type to extend it with an additional dictionary. > So the question remains: why did Nick *have* to implement this > as meta-type ? As I understand it, PyStructSequence_InitType() is a factory for types aka metaclasses. The above statment 'he reused the type object to mimic a sequence' is IMO wrong. *My* question would be (maybe this is what MAL meant): why aren't the created types subclasses of PyTupleType? 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