> Consider it dead. =)
RIP. ;)
--
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-a
> Removing __metaclass__ in Python 3000
> -
>
> As a side-effect of its generality, the make-statement mostly
> eliminates the need for the ``__metaclass__`` attribute in class
> objects. Thus in Python 3000, instead of::
(...)
One of the reasons that this PEP
On 4/18/06, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've updated PEP 359 with a bunch of the recent suggestions. The
> patch is available at:
> http://bugs.python.org/1472459
> and I've pasted the full text below.
>
> I've tried to be more explicit about the goals -- the make statement
> i
Definitely an intriguing idea! I am +0 just because I don't know how
needed it is, but it is definitely cool.
As for your open issues, ditching __metaclass__ is fine if this goes
in, but I would keep 'class' around as simplified syntactic sugar for
the common case.
-Brett
On 4/18/06, Steven Bet
