New submission from Jon Obermark:
If they are not going to call the __metaclass__ or the class __new__, then they
should return `set` objects instead of subclass objects, so that it is clear
what is going on.
As it is, the results of set operations receive some subclass information but
not all. So they are not really obeying the notion of a subclass: the results
are neither `set` objects, nor properly-constructed objects of the `set`
subclass.
e.g.
class Fooset(Set):
def __new__(cls, s = []):
print 'New called'
self = super(Fooset, cls).__new__(cls)
self.update(s)
if isinstance(s, Fooset):
self.foo = s.foo
else:
self.foo = 'default'
return self
x = Fooset([1,2,5])
y = x|x
The object `y` reports being of the type `Fooset`, but has not been constructed
by the `type` that makes `Fooset` objects.
--
messages: 169986
nosy: Jon.Obermark
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: set.__or__, __and__, etc create subclass types, but ignore __new__
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15879>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
