> > I don't think it's necessary to forbid things at the C API level in > > the sense of making it impossible to do. We'll just document > > that C code shouldn't do that. > > What about Python code that modifies that module __dict__ directly? For > example, using vars() or globals() to get a reference to it and doing > __setitem__ on it. My warning code only catches assignments that go > through the module tp_setattro slot. I suppose warning about direct > __dict__ poking would require a proxy object to wrap the module dict. Yeah, that's another niggling issue. It would be a shame if using globals() or vars() anywhere in a module would disable this optimization. But we can't make these return a proxy either, because they are frequently used with e.g. "exec ... in globals()". --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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