On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > This version looks fine to me.
\o/ > The definition order question has been dropped from PEP 487, so this > cross-reference doesn't really make sense any more :) Ah, so much for my appeal to authority. <wink> > I'd characterise this section at the language definition level as the > default class definition namespace now being *permitted* to be an > OrderedDict. For implementations where dict is ordered by default, > there's no requirement to switch specifically to > collections.OrderedDict. Yeah, I'd meant to fix that. > This paragraph is a little confusing, since "set > ``__definition_order__`` manually" is ambiguous. > > "supply an explicit ``__definition_order__`` via the class namespace" > might be clearer. ack > I realised there's another important reason for doing it this way by > default: it's *really easy* to write a "skip_dunder_names" filter that > leaves out dunder names from an arbitrary interable of strings. It's > flatout *impossible* to restore the dunder attribute order if the > class definition process throws it away. Yep. That's why I felt fine with relaxing that. I guess I didn't actually put that in the PEP though. :) -eric _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
