Message111508
| Author |
belopolsky |
| Recipients |
Christophe Simonis, belopolsky, jackdied, pitrou, rhettinger, vdupras |
| Date |
2010年07月24日.22:12:47 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.024273964 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1280009569.47.0.660491269319.issue7830@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> FWIW, I agree with Antoine. You cannot know in advance whether a
> partial-subclass has semantics that need to be preserved when
> flattening.
Raymond,
I have actually conceded this point to Antoine. See msg108980 above. Not only the latest patch preserves partial-subclasses, it also foregoes the optimization if there is anything in __dict__ of the inner partial.
It looks like we have a consensus on the features, the remaining question is whether this is enough of an optimization to justify adding extra code. |
|