On 16 November 2017 at 07:56, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 November 2017 at 04:39, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivskyi at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Nick is exactly right here. Jim, if you want to propose alternative >> wording, then we could consider it. >> > > Jim also raised an important point that needs clarification at the spec > level: given multiple entries in "orig_bases" with __mro_entries__ methods, > do all such methods get passed the *same* orig_bases tuple? Or do they > receive partially resolved ones, such that bases listed before them have > already been resolved to their MRO entries by the time they run. > > > Yes, they all get the same initial bases tuple as an argument. Passing updated ones will cost a bit more and I don't think it will be needed (in the worst case a base can resolve another base by calling its __mro_entries__ manually). I will clarify this in the PEP. -- Ivan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20171116/91eeb041/attachment.html>
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