skip at pobox.com wrote:
> Nick> Any old code could be fixed by putting "from types import
> Nick> ClassType as __metaclass__" at the top of the affected modules.
>
> Which would be, what, 90% of all Python code written that defines classes?
I generally don't allow old-style classes in any code I have control over
(well, aside from exceptions). Having to type '(object)' all the time is
annoying, but less annoying than trying to figure out which set of semantics a
given class is using. My interpreter startup script even includes
"__metaclass__ = None" in order to disable the implicit metaclass.
I think it's an artifact of only seriously starting to use Python with version
2.2.2 - I don't really understand how old-style classes work, so I try to
avoid using them.
However, you raise a fair point, which is why I raised the suggestion of
respecting a "__metaclass__" definition in the builtins, allowing application
developers to perform their own new-style class smoke test prior to Py3k.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
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