RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jan 4 21:18:15 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/050642.html

[me]
> > Actually, unbound builtin methods are a different type than bound
> > builtin methods:

[Jim]
> Of course, but conceptually they are similar.  You would still
> encounter the concept if you got an unbound builtin method.

Well, these are all just implementation details. They really are all
just callables.

[Jp]
>   This would make pickling (or any serialization mechanism) of
> `Class.method' based on name next to impossible.  Right now, with
> the appropriate support, this works:
> 
>     >>> import pickle
>     >>> class Foo:
>     ...     def bar(self): pass
>     ...
>     >>> pickle.loads(pickle.dumps(Foo.bar))
>     <unbound method Foo.bar>
>     >>>
> 
>   I don't see how it could if Foo.bar were just a function object.

Is this a purely theoretical objection or are you actually aware of
anyone doing this? Anyway, that approach is pretty limited -- how
would you do it for static and class methods, or methods wrapped by
other decorators?

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-January/050642.html below:

[Python-Dev] Let's get rid of unbound methods