At 10:20 AM 6/28/2007 -0700, Robert Brewer wrote: >tav wrote: > > But, all I am asking for is to not expose func_closure (and perhaps > > some of the other func_*) as members of FunctionType -- isn't it > > possible to add functionality to the ``new`` module which would allow > > one to read/write func_closure? > >Would func_closure then also be removed from the FunctionType >constructor arg list? That wouldn't be necessary, since restricted code is probably not going to be allowed access to new in the first place. We're talking about removing read access to the closure *attribute* only. (And write access to func_code would also have to be removed, else you could replace the bytecode in order to grant yourself read access to the closure contents...) >If so, would I be expected to create a function >object and then use the "new" module to supply its func_closure? Nope. The idea here is that the new module would grow utility functions like get_closure, get_code, set_code, get_subclasses, etc. The 'inspect' module would then use these functions to do its job, and I would use them for generic function stuff.
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