On Sa, 2016-09-10 at 12:01 +0200, Sebastian Berg wrote: > Hi all, > > from the discussion, I was thinking maybe something like this: > > class B(): > def __numpy_getitem__(self, index, indexing_method="plain"): > # do magic. > return super().__numpy_getitem__( > index, indexing_method=indexing_method) > > as new API. There are some issues, though. An old subclass may define > `__getitem__`. Now the behaviour that would seem nice to me is: > > 1. No new attribute (no `__numpy_getitem__`) and also no > `__getitem__`/`__setitem__`: Should just work > 2. No new attribute but old attributes defined: Should at > least give a warning (or an error) when using the new > attributes, since the behaviour might buggy. > 3. `__numpy_getitem__` defined: Will channel all indexing through it > (except maybe some edge cases in python 2). Best, also avoid that > use getitem in setitem trick.... If you define both (which might > make sense for some edge case stuff), you should just channel it > through this yourself. >
Maybe in shorter; I would like to know if a subclass: 1. requires no fixup 2. may need fixup 3. supports everything. And I am not sure how to approach this. > Now the issue I have is that for 1. and 2. to work correctly, I need > to > know which methods are overloaded by the subclass. Checking is a bit > tedious and the method I hacked first for getitem and setitem does > not > work for a normal method. > > Can anyone think of a nicer way to do this trick that does not > require > quite as much hackery. Or is there an easy way to do the overloading > check? > > - Sebastian > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
