A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090632.html below:

[Python-Dev] 2.6 object.__init__ & deling __new__

[Python-Dev] 2.6 object.__init__ & deling __new__ [Python-Dev] 2.6 object.__init__ & deling __new__Dino Viehland dinov at microsoft.com
Tue Jul 14 23:25:34 CEST 2009
Benjamin wrote:

> There's a wonderful comment about this in typeobject.c:
>

This is basically the same what I've gathered from the issue
description which was quite helpful.  But in this case we're
dealing with mutating the type object and changing whether
__new__ or __init__ exist at all at runtime - and
object.__new__/__init__ don't seem to be picking up on the
change.

I believe that the comments here w.r.t. mutability/immutability
are more about whether the instances are immutable and not
the type objects themselves - for example list vs tuple where
tuple has __new__ but no __init__.

Based upon the behavior I'm seeing it seems to me that the
presence of __new__ / __init__ must be getting cached somewhere
and the deletion isn't updating the cache and that's specifically
what struck me as odd here.



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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